IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15223 of 2009 1. PALTAN RAM S/O LATE KALLAR RAM VILL- HAJPURA, P.O. KUSAIYA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SAMATIPUR 3. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE SAMASTIPUR 4. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER SAMASTIPUR 5. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER-CUM-EXECUTIVE OFFICER WARISNAGAR PANCHAYAT SAMITI, WARISNAGAR, SAMASTIPUR 6. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE SHIVJEE PRASAD SINGH VILL- RAUSA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 7. MD. NAUSHAD S/O MD. FAROOQUE VILL-NAGARBASTI, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 8. MALINDI SUMAN W/O SRI RAMAVATAR SINGH VILL- SATMALPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 9. PREMLATA DEVI W/O LATE VAKIL RAI VILL- PURNAHI, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 10. INDU DEVI W/O UPENDRA THAKUR VILL- RAHUA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 11. ASHA DEVI W/O RAM LAKHAN SAH VILL- RAHUA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 12. KAMINI DEVI W/O SITARAM BAITHA VILL- DARSUN, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 13. YUGESHWAR RAI S/O RAM PUNIT RAI VILL- BASANTPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 14. VINOD SHANKAR RAI S/O LATE SRICHAND RAI VILL- MANIARPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 15. MD. UMAR S/O LATE ABDUL RAHMAN VILL- GOHI, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 16. GIRISH KUMAR S/O JHOTI MAHTO VILL- MALTIA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 17. GANGA RAM S/O SRI TILAK RAM VILL- RAIPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 18. MAYA DEVI W/O UMESH DAS VILL- HAJPURA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 19. NAGINA MAHTO S/O SHARAN MAHTO VILL- DHURLAKH, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 20. URMILA DEVI W/O AWADHESH RAI VILL- MADHOPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 21. SUSHILA DEVI W/O BALESHWAR PASWAN VILL- DHANHAR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 22. NEELAM DEVI W/O DHARMENDRA MAHTO VILL- BALAHI, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 23. DEEPAK KUMAR CHAUDHARY S/O RAMESH KUMAR SAHNI VILL- MATHURAPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 24. KRISHNA DEVI W/O RAJENDRA SAHNI VILL- MATHURAPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 25. VIBHA DEVI W/O RAJESH RAI VILL- SARI, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR - 2 - 26. BIRENDRA KUMAR S/O BAGESHWARI SINGH VILL- KISHANPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 27. PINKI DEVI W/O KANHAIYA JHA VILL- LAKHANPATTI, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 28. PRADEEP PASWAN S/O PATHRU PASWAN VILL- SHEKHOPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 29. DHARMENDRA KUMAR S/O RAM DAYAL RAI VILL- SHEKHOPUR, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 30. RAM BHAJAN THAKUR S/O LATE JUGAL THAKUR VILL- LOTHA, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 31. DHARMENDRA MAHTO S/O JAGDISH MAHTO VILL- RAMPUR BISHU, P.S. WARISNAGAR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR ----------- 02 23.12.2009 The petitioner in the present writ application is the Pramukh of Warisnagar Panchayat Samiti in the district of Samastipur. He challenges the action taken by the Block Development Officer, Warisnagar, Samastipur for his removal as Pramukh by no confidence motion. De hors of all other factual details, he submits that the Block Development Officer, who is the Executive Officer of the Gram Panchayat Samiti issued notice in terms of Section 46(iv) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 convening a special meeting for consideration of no confidence motion on 13.11.2009. Petitioner filed this writ application on 09.11.2009 challenging that the notice was not in accordance - 3 - with Section 46(iv) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act. Section 46(iv) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act clearly provides that the notice must contain 7 clear days time. He further submits that 7 clear days time after 6th November would be 14th November on wards and it could not be 13th November. Thus, the notice fixing the date of meeting is contrary to the statute. By an interlocutory application he has brought on record that on the date of the said meeting petitioner protested and did not participate in the meeting. Notwithstanding that meeting was held and petitioner is shown to have lost the confidence of the house. Petitioner submits that notice convening the meeting itself being invalid. The meeting consequently held cannot be valid and must be declared invalid. Respondent nos.6&16, who are members of the Gram Panchayat Samiti have appeared and submitted that the - 4 - defect in issuance of notice and in fixing the date is mere irregularity and not illegality. It can thus be ignored but he does not dispute the facts as aforesaid. So far as State is concerned, State also does not dispute the fact as aforesaid. All parties are in agreement that Section 46(iv) of the Act provides for a 7 clear days notice, which was not given. In my view, the parties are in agreement about the fact and in agreement about the statutory requirement, there is no escape from holding that the notice as issued fixing the date as 13.11.2009, as the date of special meeting for considering no confidence motion, was not in accordance with Section 46(iv) of the Act. The notice not being in accordance with law is, thus, a nullity and any action taken thereon cannot be valid by any stretch of imagination and must accordingly void. Thus, the result passed on - 5 - 13.11.2009, expressing no confidence in the petitioner, is invalid. It may be specifically noted that even on that day petitioner protested and did not participate in the proceedings, he abstained. Thus, being the position, the result is not a resolution in accordance with law and cannot be sustained. It is set aside as such. The Block Development Officer-cum-Executive Officer, Warisnagar, Samastipur would be entitled to reconvene a meeting giving the grounds for consideration of no confidence motion and fixing a meeting if it was requisitioned in accordance with law. With these observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)