IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.854 of 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.12424 OF 2009 ============================================ LAXMAN CHAURASIA - Appellant Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS - Respondent(s) ============================================ Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Prem Kumar Verma Mr.Krishna Bihari Mr. Arbind Kumar Mr. Rajendra Kumar Dubey For The Respondents : Mr. (GP19) Mr. R.S.Pradhan Mr. Santosh Kumar Mr. Pushkar Narayan Shahi Mr. Nityanand Mishra =========================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 23.9.2010. This appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises from the order dated 1st April 2010 made by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No.12424 of 2009. The appellant is the writ petitioner. He was elected Mayor of Ara Municipal Corporation. He has challenged the election of the Mayor of the Corporation held on 20th July 2009. It is the case of the appellant that he was elected as Mayor in the year 2007. Another Mayor could not have been 2 elected while the appellant was Mayor of the Corporation. It is alleged that the election of the Mayor was held on 20th July 2009 on account of the resignation allegedly tendered by the appellant. The appellant has disputed the factum of his tendering resignation. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition as the appellant did not question the election programme declared on 7th July 2009; nor did he challenge the election held on 20th July 2009 for two months thereafter. Therefore, the present appeal. Learned Advocate Mr. Prem Kumar Verma has appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that appellant’s purported resignation was returned by the Divisional Commissioner. Thus, even if the resignation were tendered, it was not operative. In support thereof, he has relied upon section 25(2) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007. We are not able to accept the arguments advanced before us. The resignation in question was tendered by the appellant on 24th June, 2009. The submission that the Divisional Commissioner did not accept the resignation and returned it, is fallacious. On 25th June 2009 the resignation was forwarded for further action, in case it were not 3 withdrawn within seven days. Admittedly the appellant did not withdraw the resignation. In view of Section 25(3)(2) of the Act, it had become effective on expiry of seven days i.e on 1st July 2009. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge has rightly considered the conduct of the appellant and held that the appellant had indeed tendered the resignation. No case for interference is made out. The appeal is dismissed in limine. ahk (R. M. Doshit, CJ) (Jyoti Saran, J)