IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12387 of 2008 Mohd.Maksud Alam, son of Sk. Abbas, Resident of village-Parsawan, P.S. Chandradeep, P.O. Abgila, Chauraca, District-Jamui …………………… Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jamui 3. The Block Development Officer, Islam Nagar-Aliganj Block, District-Jamui 4. The Pramukh, Panchayat Samittee, Islam Nagar-Aliganj, Block, Dist. Jamui 5. Sri Awadh Kishore Singh 6. Sri Tulsi Ram 7. Sri Aftab Ansari 8. Md. Anwar 9. Sri Dipu Paswan 10. Smt. Kiran Devi 11. Ur. Pramila Devi 12. Smt. Savitri Devi 13. Smt. Mamta Paswan 14. Smt. Renu Ranjan Yadav 15. Sri Israrul Haque, all are resident of Islamnagar-Aliganj Block, District-Jamui ……………………………….. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner:- Mr. V.B.P.Ambastha,Advocate For Respondents: M/S. Arun Kumar & Chandrashekhar Singh Azad, Advocates For the State: M/S: Sajal K. Sinha, AC to GP 17. ---------- 9. 05.03.2009 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, for the private respondents and for the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the un-dated requisition (Annexure-2) to convene the special meeting for consideration of no confidence motion against the petitioner and also the notice dated 16.8.2008 (Annexure-1) issued by the Block Development Officer by which the date of the special meeting for considering no confidence motion has been fixed on 26.8.2008. The principal contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the requisition has been submitted before the Sub- - 2 - Divisional Officer in violation of the provisions of Section 44(3)(i) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 which mandates that the same ought to be presented only before the Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti. Learned counsel also contends that the reasons/charges mentioned in the requisition are vague and non-specific which again is in violation of Section 44(3)(v) of the Act. Learned counsel for the appearing respondents does not seriously contest the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the writ application is allowed and the requisition (Annexure-2) as also the notice dated 16.8.2008 (Annexure-1) to convene the special meeting for considering the no confidence motion are both quashed. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)