IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13194 of 2008 PRABHU YADAV, son of Shri Dukhi Yadav, resident ofr village Fatehpur, Police Station- Khaira, District-Jamui. …………….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Special Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Department of Panchayat Raj, Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Jamui 5. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Jamui 6. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jamui 7. The Executive Officer-cum- Block Development Officer, Khaira, Jamui 8. Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Jeet Jhangui, Khaira, Jamui 9. Sangita Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Khaira, Jamui 10. Pinnki Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Dabil, Khaira, Jamui 11. Rita Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Kendih, Khaira, Jamui 12. Diwakar Kumar Das, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Kharaich, Khaira, Jamui 13. Rajkumar Pandit, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Mangobandar, Khaira, Jamui 14. Manju Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Chuwan, Khaira, Jamui 15. Krishna Kumar Singh, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Kageshwar, Khaira, Jamui 16. Arun Rajak, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Goli, Khaira, Jamui 17. Umesh Ravidas, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Kageshwar, Khaira, Jamui 18. Lalita Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Bhimain, Khaira, Jamui 19. Parwati Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Neem Nawada, Khaira, Jamui 20. Ramesh Sao, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Raipura, Khaira, Jamui 21. Savo Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Amari, Khaira, Jamui 22. Anju Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Harhkhar, Khaira, Jamui 23. Babita Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Gopalpur, Khaira, Jamui 24. Azrul Khan, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Banpur, Khaira, Jamui 25. Savia Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Amari, Khaira, Jamui 26. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Jeet Jhingoi, Khaira, Jamui 27. Rukmini Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Kharainch, Khaira, Jamui 28. Sita Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Bela, Khaira, Jamui 29. Mahadev Hansda, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Harni, Khaira, Jamui 30. Niranjan Yadav, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Bishanpur, Khaira, Jamui 31. Rampa Devi, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Jhundo, Khaira, Jamui 32. Gangadhar Yadav, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Arnamabak, Khaira, Jamui 33. Madan Mohan Singh, Member, Panchayhat Samiti, Arnamabak, Khaira Jamui - 2 - 34. Yamuna Pandit, Member, Panchayat Samiti, Garhi, Khaira, Jamui ……………. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner:- M/S Vindhyachal Singh, Umesh Kumar & Prashant Kumar, Advocates. For the State: - M/S Manushankar Mishra, GP 10 and Suresh Mishra,Advocate For Private Respondents: - M/S S.P.Srivastava, Rajeev Ranjan, Mithilesh Kumar Singh and Kumar Ravish, Advocates. ----------- 5. 27.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks quashing of the letter dated 27.8.2008 issued under the signature of the Executive Officer-cum- Block Development Officer, Khaira, Jamui convening special meeting on 5.9.2008 to consider the proposal of no confidence motion against the petitioner- Up-pramukh of the Khaira Panchayat Samiti and other consequential reliefs. The main ground taken by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the notice dated 27.8.2008 for convening the special meeting on 5.9.2008 for considering no confidence motion against the petitioner does not contain clear and specific charges as per the requirement of Section 44(3) (v) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 and whatever allegations made therein are vague, non-specific and general. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation is that whenever the petitioner had presided over the meetings of the Panchayat Samiti as its Adhakshya he had not performed his duty in proper manner and shown disrespect towards the members. Learned counsel submits that as a matter of fact, the - 3 - petitioner had presided over the meeting of the Panchayat Samiti only once on 2.5.2008 and thus prima facie the charges appear to be not made out and in any case the manner in which the charges have been laid out no fruitful discussion are possible with respect to the same. In support of the aforesaid proposition, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Lalan Singh & ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & ors. : 2002 (3) PLJR 201. Learned counsel for the respondents does not seriously oppose the stand of the petitioner that the charges as contained in the requisition as also the notice for convening the special meeting are vague, non-specific and general and not clear and specific. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is allowed and the notice dated 27.8.2008 is quashed. It is made clear that since the impugned requisition has been held to be not in accordance with the provisions of the Act, therefore, it would be open to the respondent-members of the Panchayat Samiti to proceed afresh in the matter in accordance with law. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)