MOLVI HABIB ULLAH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MAU DISTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner No. 1 is the President of the Municipal Board, Maunath Bhanjan and the petitioner no. 2 is an elected member of the said Board. THE District Magistrate on 31st March, 1990, issued a notice convening a meeting of the Board to consider a motion of non- confidence in the petitioner no. 1 At that stage, the petitioners came to this Court by means of this petition. Today the position is that even though the motion of non-confidence in the petitioner no. 1 has been carried but the same has not been given effect to so far on account of the interim orders passed by this Court.

(2.) THE controversy in this petition is in a narrow compus. THE Board comprised of 22 elected members, two ex officio members, two nominated members and the President directly elected. Thus, the total membership was 27.

(3.) WE make take judicial notice of the fact that the aforesaid Ordinance No. 2 of 1990 was followed by U. P. Ordinance No. 9 of 1990 and that Ordinance was replaced by U. P. Act No. 19 of 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the Amending Act). The Amending Act added yet another proviso after the third proviso to section 9 to the effect that member nominated, whether before or after the commencement of the said Ordinance, shall hold office during the pleasure of the State Government. The notification dated 19th February, 1990 was a general one as by means of it the State Government in the purported exercise of powers under the aforementioned proviso cancelled the nomination of all the nominated members of the Municipal Boards in the State.