IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17817 of 2010 SANJAY DAS . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 02. 03.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State, for the State Election Commission and for the respondent no.-19. On 17.10.2010 notice was issued by the Executive Officer fixing 25.10.2010 for consideration of the “No Confidence Motion” against the petitioner who was the Pramukh. It was so tabled when the petitioner has lost and a new Pramukh has been elected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact, no notice was issued on 17.10.2010. The date is fictitious and the document ante-dated. In fact, the notice has been issued only on 21.10.2010 only for the meeting to be held on 25.10.2010. This does not meet the requirement of Section 46 (4) of the Bihar Panchayati Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter called the Act) which stipulates a seven clear days notice for a special meeting. It is next submitted that 17.10.2010 was a Sunday and also a public holiday on account of Durga Puja festival. Government offices remained closed from 14.10.2010 to 17.10.2010 and therefore there was no occasion for the Executive Officer to receive any 2 direction of the Up-Pramukh dated 16.10.2010 fixing the date for the special meeting on 25.10.2010. Learned counsel for the State and respondent no.19 have urged that once the petitioner has lost the “No Confidence Motion”, other issues may not be relevant in absence of any prejudice being demonstrated. If the law stipulates an act to be done in a particular manner, it can be done in that manner alone in no other manner. If seven clear days notice is mandatory in the law for a special meeting, requisition contrary to the same would undoubtedly be unsustainable. If the notice had in fact been issued on 17.10.2010, the requirement of the law for seven clear days notice shall stand fulfilled. Merely because it may have been Sunday may not be sufficient unless the petitioner demonstrates prejudice. But, if the notice bore the dated 17.10.2010, and it came to be issued only on 21.10.2010 that shall not meet the requirement of the law. Preparation of the notice shall not tantamount to issuance of the notice. It is the emphatic case of the petitioner that notice was served on the members on 21.10.2010 only. This is primarily a question of fact to be decided after verification of the original records of the Executive Officer, including the 3 dispatch register etc. The application is disposed with directions to the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar to call for the original records and satisfy himself if the requisition for the meeting was in fact issued on 17.10.2010 or not. Since it was a Sunday, the Secretary shall be required to fully satisfy himself that considering the urgency of the matter, the issue was dealt with and considered fully in accordance with law and that the notice was not only prepared on 17.10.2010 but dispatched on the same date also. Mere preparation of notice on 17.10.2010 but dispatch of the same on 21.20.2010 shall clearly fall foul of Section 46 (4) of the Panchayati Raj Act. If the requisition for the special meeting does not meet the requirement of the law all consequential action in pursuance of the same shall naturally stand vitiated. Let the Secretary, Panchayati Raj pass final appropriate orders after examining the original records and hearing all concered within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The application stands disposed. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)