IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13784 of 2008 NAND KISHORE ROY, S/O LATE JAGDAMBI ROY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- RANI, P.O. RANI, P.S. BACHHWARA, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI. …. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BEGUSARAI. 3. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TEGHRA, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI. 4. THE DISTRICT- PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER, BEGUSARAI, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI. 5. THE EXECUTIVE SOFFICER-CUM-BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BLOCK-BACHHWARA, DISTCIT BEGUSARAI. 6. SHRI KAMAL PASWAN, PRAMUKH OF PANCHAYAT SAMITI, BACHHWARA, SUB-DIVISION, TEGHRA, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI. 7. SHRI SANJAY CHOUDHARY. 8. SHRI BIPIN KUMAR MAHTO. 9. SHRI RAJ KISHORE ROY. 10. SHRI BAIDYANATH YADAV. 11. SHRI JANARDAN ROY. 12. SHRI KRISHANAND ROY. 13. SHRI RAMBALAK SAHANI. 14. SHRI CHOTAN SAHNI. 15. SHRI SANAULLAH ANSARI. 16. SMT. BACHHI DEVI. 17. SMT. RAMRATI DEVI. 18. SMT USHA DEVI. 19. SMT. MANJULA DEVI. 20. SMT. BEENA DEVI. 21. SMT. SULOCHNA DEVI. 22. SMT. RANJU DEVI. 23. SMT. GEETANJALI DEVI. 24. SMT. INDU DEVI. 25. SMT. INARKALA DEVI. 26. SMT. SEEMA KUMARI. 27. SMT. PHOOL KUMARI. 28. SMT. GAYATRI DEVI. 2 RESPONDENT NO. 7 TO 28 ARE THE MEMBERS OF PANCHAYAT SAMITI- BACHHWARA, SUB- DIVISION- TEGHRA, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI. … RESPONDNETS. For the petitioner: M/s. Prakash Srivastava & Santosh Bharte, Advocate. For the State : Raj Kishore Singh, A.C. to G.P-13. ----------- 3. 20.12.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Counsel for the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit placing on record the proceedings of the special meeting dated 25.8.2008, Annexure-8 of the Panchayat Samiti, Bachhwara in the District of Begusarai whereunder no confidence motion has been passed against the petitioner Up-Pramukh in the light of the notice dated 14.8.2008, Annexure-4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that perusal of notice dated 14.8.2008, Annexure- 4 would indicate that thereunder the charges alleged against the Up-Pramukh has not been detailed nor the copy of the requisition dated 8.8.2008, Annexure-2 has been enclosed with the requisition and thereby the notice dated 14.8.2008, Annexure-4 and the proceedings of the special meeting dated 25.8.2008, Annexure-8 infract the provisions 3 contained in Sub-clause(V) of Section 44(3) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 which interalia requires that the reasons/charges levelled against the Pramukh/Up Pramukh sought to be debated at the time of consideration of the no confidence motion be clearly indicated in the notice. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that aforesaid submission has already been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court under judgment dated 3.2.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12611 of 2008 and other analogous matter. 3. Having perused the notice dated 14.8.2008, Annexure-4 it is quite evident that the same does not contain the charges on the basis of which no confidence motion is to be moved against the petitioner Up-Pramukh. Accordingly, the notice dated 14.8.2008 and the subsequent resolution of the special meeting conducted on 25.8.2008 is quashed, however, with liberty to the Executive Officer of the Panchayat Samiti, Bachhwara to issue fresh notice containing charges alleged against the Up-Pramukh in accordance with law. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Ibrar/- (V.N. Sinha, J) 4