LAWS(KAR)-1986-1-10

SRIMANTHI Vs. CHIEF OFFICER

Decided On January 03, 1986
SRIMANTHI Appellant
V/S
CHIEF OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though this petition is posted for orders, having regard to the fact that it relates to a no confidence motion moved and passed against the petitioner and also that it can be disposed of on a short point, it is taken up for final disposal by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) 2.1 The petitioner was elected as the President of the Town Municipal Council, Sadalga, Belgaum District. The case of the petitioner as pleaded in the petition is that she received the communication dated 14-10-1985, produced as Annexure - A from the Deputy Commissioner, Belgaum, requesting her to take necessary action as per the Karnataka Municipalites Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') regarding the notice dated 25-9 1985 given by the Councillors to move motion of no confidence against the petitioner; that she came to know of the intention of the Councillors to move motion of no confidence only through the communication dated 14-10-1985 (Annexure-A) ; that she gave a reply to the Deputy Commissioner on 28-10-1985 as per Annexure-B ; that thereafter the Chief Officer also intimated her about the notice received by him ; and she sent a reply to the Chief Officer acknowledging his letter and further informing him that she had written to the Deputy Commissioner and on receipt of the reply from the Deputy Commissioner necessary action would be taken. This communication is produced as Annexure-C ; that the petitioner was not served with the notice as per the first proviso to Sub-section (9) of Section 42 of the Act. In the objections filed by her to I.A. No. I filed by the contesting respondents, she has further pleaded that she was not at Sadalga from 2-10-1985 to 13-10-1985 as she Was admitted in the clinic at Ichalakaranji for treatment; that she had not refused to receive the notice ; that the postman had never brought the registered cover to her arid on 11-10-1985 she was an in-patient at Smita Hospital at Ichalakaranji ; that the notice of 10 days ought to have been given of a special general meeting ; that the petitioner had not refused to call for a special general meeting.

(3.) 3.1 The case of the contesting respondents is that the Council consists of 15 members; that the notice dated 25-9 1985 signed by 11 Councillors was sent on 4-10-1985 by registered post with acknowledgement due to the petitioner stating that they have lost confidence' in her; therefore, they intend to move a motion of no confidence against her, therefore a Special General Meeting be called for that purpose. This notice according to the case of the contesting respondents was refused to be received by the petitioner on 11-10-1985. Therefore the postman returned it with the shara that "the addressee refused to receive hence returned to the sender''; that under these circumstances there is a presumption of due service. They have produced the closed cover with acknowledgment containing the postal shara of the postman. On the direction of the Court, the Court Officer has opened the cover, which contains the notice and the same is marked as Document No. 1. It is the further case of the contesting respondents that thereafter the petitioner did not call for Special General Meeting of the Council to consider the no confidence motion; therefore the Vice-President instructed the Chief Officer of the Municipal Council to call for the special general meeting of the Council to consider the no confidence motion. Accordingly, the Chief Officer issued notices to the Councillors including the petitioner calling for the Special General Meeting of the Council on 3-11-1985. This notice was receded by the petitioner on 2-11-1985. The meeting was held on 3-11-1985 and the no confidence motion was moved against the petitioner. The petitioner did not attend the meeting. 13 Councillors out of 15 supported the motion. Accordingly, the motion of no confidence was passed on 3-11-1985 with the support of more than 2/3rd members of the Council.