ABDUL WAJID Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a special appeal against the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the appellant's petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The facts briefly are as follows:

(2.) IN October 1953, the appellant was elected a President of the Municipal Board, Bareilly. On 15-12-1954, a notice of intention to move a non-confidence motion was given by twenty-seven members of the Board to the District Magistrate along with the motion of non-confidence. This was under Section 87a (2) of the Municipalities Act.

(3.) THEREUPON the District Magistrate issued notice to the members of the Board that a meeting to consider the non-confidence motion would be held on 17-1-1955, at 11 A. M. in the Municipal office. The notice, however, was not accompanied with a full copy of the non-confidence motion. On 17-1-1955 a meeting was held and the Chairman of the meeting was Mr. R. P. Saksena, Civil and Sessions Judge of Bareilly. He had no copy of the non-confidence motion with him. It was sent for from the office of the District Magistrate within five minutes and the proceedings were commenced by reading out the text of the motion of non-confidence. Thereafter discussions took place, and after discussions votes taken, and 32 persons are said to have voted for the motion, out of 38 that were present. The Presiding Officer thereupon declared the motion to be carried and sent intimation of the same to the District Magistrate and the appellant.