WW W13, w: zoo amm (W) WW mm: W mmwwm’ 3 )7 /o) m 20a WW(FW) mm‘efgam mm fs‘3W *WW to direct t the Nagar Panchayat Gundexdehi, Tahsil Gun eniehi, Distt. Durg notgto issue work order beyo d the financial limit a$ prascribcd under tha till Chief Municipal Offlcer is validly appointad. Grievance of the petitio er is that the Chic Municipal omcer, Nagai Panchavat uundemetu Vida his memo dated r’ 8 2008 called a nmetmg of Nagar Panchaycu, ndemem on l2n8—2008. The agenda of the meeting was circula ed vide his memo dafed 8-8~2008. Accpniiugiy, the meeting convened on 12—8-2008, in which certain msolutions were passe . Lemued counsel for th petitioner submits mat sub-section 3 of Section 56 of the CG. Mu 'eipaiities Act, 1961 dearly stipuiates that the notice for 'con ciispatehec‘t to the councilors. e 7 clear (lays before an ordinary meeting. In the instant case, imation has been dispatched on 5-8- 2€>08 but the agenda for the was cneulated oniy on 8~8~2008 in contravention of sub—section of Section 56 of the Municipalities Act and thus any resolution pa J[\ meeting of the council is to be \ in the said meeting is invalid. AS. Kachhawaha, learned Dy Adv. General submits thatmthe) 1 solutions wele passed bv the Nagar Panchayat with requisite maiority of the members of the council. From the documents tiled by the petitioner, it would be evident that s On the other-hand, / in. rammww a 1 u w v ’ g / r ‘ t s e ' S Q? w (0 Mo 3.. ) wzaa mm<m) mm awéwfmW 3mmW WW fi'étm $$ifaqm WWW $6? ;».‘mwwm.~ _ 7 W file notice of The meeting w ciiSpatchad to the counciiors on 5—8— 2008, which is '7 ciays beforE the date of meeting. if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of 1th Chief Municipai Gfficer of convening meeting, he had aitenlative r medy of filing appeal against the Older of the Chief Municipai Office dated 5-8—2008 whereby he conveneci the general bociy meeting of counou on 12 5 )UuzS and ne eouid have obtaineii stay: The res intion, which has been passed by the Nagar Panchayat with the rec; isite majoriiy of members of the Nagar Panchayat, cannot be questio ed by way of filing writ petition, Having heard iearned ounSei for the parties, keeping in view that the notice for convenin meeting was iseued on 5—8-2608 and the date of meeting was tixe as 12-8—2008 and further considering ‘ that if the petitioner was aggiilieved by the notice of Annexure $44, he had alternative remedy of p1 ferring appeai under Section 307 of the L G. Municipahties Act, 196 ‘ and he could have obtained stay from theappeliate authority, this rt is of the considered opinion that no interference is caiied for leiation to the lesom on passed by the Nagar Panchayat, Gunderd hi on 128—26138 in exercrse ol writ jurisdiction under Articie 2‘26 of the Constitution of india. The petition being devoid of substance, deserves to he i dismissed and is/accoidmgiy hismiseed. 7/ " ‘ \r Sd/ Dhirendra Mishra udge a e u '