IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 7805 of 2009 Dashrath Prasad, son of late Jagdeo Ram, resident of Mohalla – Kabirganj, P O + P S – Sasaram, District – Rohtas presently a Member of Sasaram Nagar Parishad, Sasaram - Petitioner Versus 1 The State of Bihar 2 The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3 The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram, District – Rohtas 4 The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, District – Rohtas at Sasaram 5 Smt Gulshan Afroz, wife of Sri Abbu Jaffar, resident of Mohalla – Mandai, Keshwar Khan, P O & P S – Sasaram, District – Rohtas at Sasaram, present the Chairman of Sasaram Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, District – Rohtas at Sasaram 6 Surendra Kumar Agrawal, son of late Jagdish Chandra Agrawal, resident of Mohalla – Nauratan Bazar, P O & P S – Sasaram, District – Rohtas at Sasaram, presently the Vice-Chairman of Sasaram Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, District – Rohtas at Sasaram 7 Najia Begum 8 Chandra Shekhar Singh 9 Shashi Pandey 10 Anita Agrawal 11 Manoj Kumar Paswan 12 Vikash Kumar 13 Umesh Kumar 14 Baby Devi 15 Hasina Bano 16 Reyaz Ahmad 17 Manoj Kumar 18 Malti Devi 19 Lalti Devi 20 Vijay Kumar Mahto 21 Kalawati Devi 22 Bihari kumar 23 Juleba Begum 24 Sanjay Chaudhary 25 Shyam Dulari Devi 26 Rita Sinha 27 Mamta Devi 28 Avinash Kumar 29 Birendra Prasad Chaurasia 30 Ramchandra Prasad Chaurasia 31 Rajesh Gond 32 Binod Prasad 33 Nasrin Bano 34 Kishan Lal Sonkar 35 Anju Devi 36 Rina Devi 37 Yatendra Kumar Singh 2 38 Dhananjay Singh 39 Sunita Singh 40 Mira Kaur 41 Sabnam Pravin 42 Nirmala Devi, respondents No 7 to 42 are the Members of the Sasaram Nagar Parishad, Sasaram through the Executive Officer, Sasaram Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, P O & P S – Sasaram, District – Rohtas at Sasaram - Respondents *** For the petitioner : Mr S B K Mangalam, Advocate For respondent No 7 : Mr Sanjay Kumar Manu, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr G A V *** 6 14.01.2010 The petitioner is a Member of the Sasaram Nagar Parishad. He has challenged the special meeting as convened under the directions of the District Magistrate, Sasaram for consideration of no confidence motion against the Chief Councillor and the Deputy Chief Councillor of the Nagar Parishad. His basic challenge is that no such meeting can be convened at the instance of the District Magistrate –cum- Collector nor can any such meeting be chaired by such a person because as per the statutory provisions, the Nagar Parishad has to conduct its own business by itself. The intrusion of the State in such local self Government would be wholly unauthorised. Upon these pleadings, interim stay was granted. Respondent No 7 is the person who had piloted the no confidence motion and had got the meeting convened. She has since appeared and wants the Court to vacate the order of stay. She is no body else than the person who 3 had contested the post of Chairman but lost to the petitioner and, on expiry of the embargo period of two years, sought to move the no confidence motion. In my view, the contention, as raised on behalf of the petitioner, must succeed. The Collector, under the Bihar Municipal Act 2007, has no authority to issue such a notice convening such a special meeting nor can he preside over any such meeting. This question has been squarely decided by this Court in a recent decision in the case of Pawan Kumar Purvey & Another –Versus- The State of Bihar & Others since reported in 2010 (1) PLJR 272 wherein this very circular issued by the State Government and similar action of the Collector has been held to be unsustainable in law. Following the aforesaid decision, the stay, granted earlier, is made absolute. The writ petition is allowed. However, this will not prevent Members from moving a fresh no confidence motion against the Chief Councillor and the Deputy Chief Councillor in accordance with law, if they so desire. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)