IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13182 of 2008 SMT.KELA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS With CWJC No.13613 of 2008 PARWATI DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS --- In C.W.J.C. No.13182/2008 For the petitioner: Mr. S.P. Srivastava,Advocate Mr. Anil Kumar,Advocate Mr. Rajeev Ranjan,Advocate For the State: Mr. Abhinay Raj J.C. to G.P.IX For State Election Commission:Mr. R.S. Pradhan,Senior Advoate Mr. Rajeev Lochan,Advocate --- In C.W.J.C.No.13613/2008 For the petitioner: Mr. Bidhyachal Singh, Advocate Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha. J.C. to G.P.15 For State Election Comission: Mr. R.S. Pradhan, Senior Advocate Mr. Rajeev Lochan, Advocate ---- 7. 15.12.2008 Heard learned counsels for the parties in both the writ petitions which relate to the same proceedings of no confidence motion in respect of Pramukh of Karpi Panchayat Samiti and, accordingly, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order . The petitioner in C.W.J.C..No.13182/2008 prays for quashing of the proceedings of no confidence motion dated 19.8.2008 and also for quashing the notice dated 14.8.2008 ( Annexure-2) issued by respondent No.5, the Block Development Officer-cum-Executive Officer, Karpi in violation of the provisions of Section 46 (4) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006. The petitioner of C.W.J.C.No.13613/2008, who is the 2 Pramukh of the said Panchayat Samiti, on the other hand, seeks quashing of the letter/ order contained in memo No.179 dated 28.8.2008 issued by the District Magistrate, Arwal, by which he has directed the Block Development Officer, Karpi to again fix a date to convene the special meeting for considering the proposal for no confidence motion dated 5.8.2008 after holding that the resolution passed in the meeting dated 19.8.2008 is void and non- existent as only five days time was given instead of 7 days time to convene the special meeting and further prays for restraining the respondents from fixing a date special meeting to consider proposal for no confidence motion against the petitioner. The petitioner has also been permitted to challenge the notice dated 14.8.2008 issued by the Executive Officer-cum- Block Development Officer on the ground that the reasons/charges mentioned in the said requisition and notice are vague and cryptic in nature and not clear and specific as required under the provisions of the Act. The short facts relevant for the decision in the present matter are that the requisition for convening the special meeting for considering no confidence motion against the Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti, namely, Parwati Devi ( respondent No.6) was presented on 5.8.2008. The special meeting for considering no confidence motion was held on 19.8.2008 and notice in this regard was issued by respondent No.5 on 14.8.2008. Out of 25 directly elected members of the Panchayat Samiti at the relevant time, in the special meeting, 12 votes were cast in favour of the motion and 12 against the no confidence motion. Accordingly, the motion was held to have been defeated. 3 Thereafter, the petitioner, Kela Devi, approached the Collector who, by his order dated 28.8.2008 set aside the proceedings of the special meeting dated 19.8.2008 on the ground that no clear 7 days notice as required under Section 46 (4) of the Act has been given and directed the Block Development Officer to convene a special meeting on another date complying with the provisions of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order of the Collelctor, both the parties have approached this Court with prayers as noted above. So far as the notice dated 14.8.2008 is concerned, it is evident that the same does not comply with the mandatory requirement of Section 46 (4) of the Act to give clear 7 days notice of the special meeting and on the face of it, the same is violative of the said mandatory provision. Accordingly, as held by this Court in a catena of decisions, the said notice being illegal and void is quashed and so also the decision taken at the special meeting pursuant to the said notice is held to be illegal and void ab initio and also quashed. So far as the challenge to the order of the Collector dated 28.8.2008 exercising his power under Section 157 of the Act is concerned, it has already been held by this Court by its order dated 27.11.2008 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11518/2008: Suryadeo Kumar and others Vs. The State of Bihar & others and analogous case, that the power under Section 157 of the Act can be exercised by the Collector at any time before the special meeting itself is held and decision taken therein and not after the said meeting has concluded. For the said reasons, the order dated 28.8.2008 passed 4 by the Collector is also set aside being void and contrary to law. With respect to violation of Section 44 (3) (v) of the Act alleged by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Parwati Devi, in the second writ petition, it is evident from a perusal of the requisition dated 5.8.2008 itself that the charges mentioned therein are completely of a general and non- specific nature and it is not at all possible for the Pramukh to answer the same or for any worthwhile discussion to take place thereon in the special meeting for considering no confidence motion. On the basis of such charges, earlier a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Lalan Singh and others Vs. State of Bihar & others: 2002 (3) PLJR 201, has held that the said charges cannot stand being vague and non specific. For the said reasons, the requisition dated 5.8.2008 and the notice containing the similar charges are also held to be violative of the above mandatory provision of the Act. The requisition is, therefore, also quashed. In view of the aforesaid findings C.W.J.C No.13182/ 2008 is allowed, whereas C.W.J.C No.13613 of 2008 is allowed to the extent indicated above. Since the entire proceedings started with the requisition and ending with the order of the Collector dated 28.8.2008 have been quashed, it shall be open to the parties to present a fresh requisition for considering no confidence motion against the Pramukh. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.)