IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17690 of 2008 LAILA KHATOON, W/o Md. Yakub Ansari, resident Of village Dumar Moh, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui----------------------petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Secretary, Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar,Patna 3.Director, Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar,Patna 4.District Magistrate, Jamui, Dist. Jamui 5.Block Development Officer, Jhajha Block, Dist. Jamui 6.Smt. Babita Devi, Pramukh, Jhajha Block, wife of Manoj Thakur, resident of village Chhapa Dhabri, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 7.Sri Onkar Prasad, son of late Chhoti Yadav, resident of Karhara, P.S. Jhajha,Dist. Jamui 8.Sri Sidheshwar Goswami, son of late Kishori Goswami, resident of Baijla, Karhara, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 9.Sri Ram Chandra Arya, son of late Vishwanath Mandal, resident of Budhikhar, Sahiya, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 10.Smt. Kusum Devi, D/o-W/o Sri Balmiki Yadav, resident of Sahiya, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 11.Sri Ramesh Thakur, son of late Vishun Thakur resident of Dhamana, Sahiya, P.S.Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 12.Smt. Kaili Hansda, D/o W/o Sri Karina Tudu, resident of Dumrdiha, Bodwa, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 13.Sri Ashok Gupta, son of Bhuma Sah, resident of Telta, Simultana, P.S. Jhajha,Dist. Jamui 14.Sri Gopal Yadav, son of Sri Mani Yadav, resident of Sidha Tand, Simultasa, P.S.Jhajha Dist. Jamui 15.Smt. Pani Bibi, W/o late Md.Mahboob, resident of Purankadih, Simultala, P.S. Jhajha,Dist.Jamui 16.Smt. Ranju Devi, W/o Sri Mahendra Thakur, resident of Avirunda, Simultala, P.S.Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 17.Smt. Munni Murmu, D/o Daud Murmu, resident of Manik P.S. Rajla Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 18.Smt. Saida Pravin, W/o Fakruddin, resident of Harna, Rajla, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 19.Sri Ramdeo Ravidas, son of late Bisho Das, resident of Parasi, Chhapardih, P.S. Jhajha Dist. Jamui 20.Smt.Manju Devi W/o d/o Sri Karu Yadav, P.O. 2 Mahapur Jhajha, P.S.Jhajha,Dist. Jamui 21.Sri Arvind Ram, son of late Baleshwar Ram, resident of Chitochak, P.S. Jhajha,Dist.Jamui 22.Smt Khatija Khatun, w/o d/o Md.Tarmul Ansari resident of Barajor, P.S. Jhajha,Dist. Jamui 23.Sri Nasim Khan, son of Rashid Khan, resident of Balio, P.S.Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 24.Sri Shankar Sharma, son of Hiraman Sharma, resident of Kawan, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 25.Sri Upendra Yadav, son of Sri Arjun Yadav, resident of Digra Dhamna, P.S. Jhajha,Dist. Jamui 26.Smt.Gulabi Devi d/o w/o Sri Shankar Mandal resident of Dhapri Barajor, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 27.Smt.Malti Devi D/o w/o Sri Vishwanath Das, resident of Sundaridhar, P.S. Jhajha,Dist.Jamui 28.Sri Mahendra Paswan, son of Jago Paswan, resident of Jamu, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 29.Sri Rajendra Yadav, son of Dhano Yadav, resident of Barakola Rajla, P.S. Jhajha, Dist. Jamui 30.Smt. Madhu d/o w/o Sri Guoal Pandit, resident of Sasarpur, P.S.Jhajha,Dist.Jamui-respondents ----------- For the petitioner :M/S Surendra Kr.Singh Sudha Singh For the State :Mr.Krishna Chandra Jha, A.C. to S.C.18 For respondent no.29:M/S Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr.Advocate Dr.Gajendra Pd.yadav For SEC :Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh. ------ 6. 17.2.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent no.29 and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has come to this Court challenging the entire proceedings of No Confidence Motion initiated against the petitioner Up-Pramukh which resulted in the 3 same being passed at the special meeting leading to her removal from the post of Up- Pramukh of Jhajha Panchayat Samiti on 24.11.2008. Three contentions have been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. Firstly, it is submitted that the requisition not being addressed to the Pramukh nor any attempt having been made to present the same to the Pramukh, rather it having been addressed to the Executive Officer-cum-Block Development Officer, is in violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 44(3)(i) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006. The second ground taken is that the notice dated 17.11.2008 does not contain any reason/charges for considering the No Confidence Motion against the petitioner, which is also in violation of mandatory provisions of Section 44(3)(i) of the Act. Lastly, it is argued that the notice dated 17.11.2008 fixing the date for convening the special meeting on 24.11.2008 violates the mandatory provisions of Section 46(4) of the Act as it does not provide for seven clear days notice. 4 Learned counsel for the appearing respondent does not seriously challenge the aforesaid contentions. In the above circumstances, the writ application is allowed. The requisition dated 11.11.2008, the notice dated 17.11.2008 as also the Resolution of No Confidence Motion against the petitioner Up-Pramukh dated 24.11.2008 are all quashed. It shall be open to the concerned respondents to proceed afresh in the matter, if so advised, in accordance with law. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) spal/