IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7436 of 2009 Pawan Kumar Agrawal, S/o-Late Ratan Kumar Agrawal, R/o-village- Bhadurganj, P.S.-Bhadurganj, District-Kishanganj, at present Chairman, Nagar Panchayat Bahadurganj, Kishangank. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Dy. Development Commissioner, Kishanganj. 3. The Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat Bahadurganj, Kishanganj. 4. Shabnam Firdausi, Vice-Chairman, Nagar Panchayat Bahadurganj, Kishanganj. 5. Rajiv Kumar, S/o-not known. 6. Dilip Kumar Thakur, S/o-not known. 7. Tufail Amali, S/o-not known. 8. Nujhat Parveen, D/o-not known. 9. Nasrin Galib, D/o-not known. 10. Ehrar Alam, S/o-not known. 11. Vishnu Nandan Jha, S/o-not known. 12. Mulajim Hussain Ansari, S/o-not known. 13. Smt. Mira Basak, W/o-not known. 14. Smt. Vinita Devi, W/o-not known. 15. Takeer Alam, S/o-not known. 16. Rahamtun Nisha, D/o-not known. 17. Bhatasam Anjum, D/o-not known. 18. Satyendra Nath Rai, S/o-not known. 19. Seema Shabunam, D/o-not known. 20. Sumitra Devi, W/o-not known. 5 to 20 are members of Nagar Panchayat, Bahadurganj, Kishanganj. -Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Bhola Prasad. For the Respondents : Mr. Sajal Kr. Sinha, A.C. to G.P.-17. ----------- 04 31.03.2010 The petitioner was the Chairman of Nagar Panchayat, Bahadurganj. By a no-confidence motion duly passed on 30.06.2009, he has been removed in terms of Section 25(4) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007. He challenges his removal by the present writ application. Heard Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel appearing - 2 - for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Mr. Giri submits that the petitioner was elected Chairman of the Bahadurganj Nagar Panchayat in this regard notification was issued on 11.06.2007. The first meeting of the Nagar Panchayat was held on 25.06.2007. A requisition thereafter was made on 11.06.2009 by the requisite number of councillors for removal of the Chairman by motion of no-confidence. At that point, there was some dispute whether it could be entertain or not, but ultimately on 26.06.2009 a notice was issued for holding the meeting for considering the no-confidence motion against the petitioner and, accordingly, on 30.06.2009 upon the motion being moved petitioner lost the confidence of the Nagar Panchayat. Mr. Giri further submits that if the dates, as aforesaid, are taken into account, it could be seen that the first meeting of the Nagar Panchayat having been held on 25.06.2007. It is that date which has to be taken to be the date on which the petitioner can be said to have assumed office or taken over the charge of the post. He refers to Sections 16 and 27 in this regards. He is correct. There can be quarrel with that. He then submits that the meeting has been requisitioned by letter dated 11.06.2009, this is undoubtedly within two years of petitioner taking over charge of the post and, as such, the requisition was invalid. I am afraid, I am unable to accept this contention. The first proviso to Section 25(4) reads thus:- 25. Removal of Chief - 3 - Councillor/Deputy Chief Councillor. ………..(4) The Chief Councillor/Deputy Chief Councillor may be removed from office by a resolution carried by a majority of the whole number of Councillors holding office for the time being at a special meeting to be called for this purpose in the manner prescribed, upon a requisition made in writing by not less than one- third of the total number of Councillors, and the procedure for the conduct of business in the special meeting shall be such as may be prescribed: “Provided that a no confidence motion shall not be brought against the Chief Councillor/Deputy Chief Councillor within a period of two years of taking over the charge of the post: Provided further that a no confidence motion shall not be brought again within one year of the first no confidence motion: Provided further also that no confidence motion shall not be brought within the residual period of six months of the municipality.” Mr. Giri contention is that no requisition for - 4 - considering no-confidence motion can be moved within two years, my reading of the proviso is otherwise. The proviso states clearly that no-confidence motion shall be brought within two years. There is distinction between a requisition calling for a meeting to consider no confidence motion at the no-confidence motion itself. Here the requisition was made on 11.06.2009, but the no- confidence motion was pressed and passed on 30.06.2009, which is well beyond the prohibited period of two years, even the notice convening the meeting was issued on 26.06.2009, which was admittedly beyond the prohibited period of two years. Thus, there is no merit in this application and it is dismissed accordingly. However, Mr. Giri points out that by amendment petition he has challenged the consequential election being held on the ground that removal was bad and, as such, there could be no further election, as the writ application has failed, the challenge to the election cannot be entertained. Trivedi (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)