S MURUGESAN Vs. COLLECTOR TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admittedly, by one-third of the sanctioned strength of the council, a representation was made under Section 40-B of the Tamilnadu District Municipalities Act, for seeking the removal of the petitioner from the post of Chairman of Naranammalpuram Town Panchayat on 3-3-2000, in pursuance of which, the Assistant Director of Town Panchayat, viz, the competent authority, convened a meeting to decide on the proposed removal of the petitioner from the post of Chairman of the Narayammalpuram Town Panchayat on 11-4-2000, which was challenged in W.P.No. 6523 of 2000. However, the said meeting could not be held due to the alleged administrative reasons, and therefore, stood adjourned to 9-8-2000, which was again challenged in W.P.No. 13429 of 2000. Again, on an alleged administrative reason, the meeting was not proceeded with on 9-8-2000, but stood adjourned to 24-8-2000, which necessitated the petitioner to file W. P.No. 14130 of 2000.

(2.) Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the proposed meeting could not be proceeded with after more than one adjournment as per Section 40-B(5).

(3.) Mr. K.R. Tamil Mani, learned Special Government Pleader, fairly bringing to the notice of this Court Section 40-B(3), (4) and (5) of the Tamilnadu District Municipalities Act, states that only one adjournment is permissible. Under such facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents cannot proceed on the impugned agenda, namely, removal of the petitioner from the post of Chairman of Naranammalpuram Town Panchayat after more than one adjournment, as held by a Division Bench of this Court by order dated 12-10-1999 made in W.A. No. 2017 of 1999 (The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by Director of Town Panchayat and another v. T. S. Vaithyalingam and another), while interpreting Section 40-A(4), (5) and (6) of the Act, which is in pari materia with Section 40-B(3), (4) and (5) of the Act.