ASHOK KUMAR Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE FATEHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. R. K. Trivedi and M. Katju, JJ. In this petition, counter affidavit has been filed. Learned counsel for the parties have agreed that this petition may be decided finally at this stage.

(2.) FACTS, in brief, giving rise to this petition are that respondent No. 3 Jag Nayak Singh was elected President of Zila Panchayat, Fatehpur, on 22. 5. 1995. The number of elected members of the Zila Panchayat was 34. One member Smt. Padma Devi Verma, however, tendered her resigna tion from the membership of Zila Panchayat on 28-12-1995 which was ac cepted on 15-12-1996. The order accepting resignation is Annexure 2 to the writ petition. Thus, the strength of the elected mem bers of the Zila Panchayat was reduced to 33. On 16-12-1996, 19 elected members of the Zila Panchayat delivered a written notice of their intention to make a motion of no confidence in the respondent No. 3 as President of the Zila Panchayat to the Col lector, Fatehpur. Along with this notice, the proposed motion and nineteen affidavits of the signatories of the notice were also filed. On the basis of this notice District Magistrate, Fatehpur in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 28 (3) of U. P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), convened a meeting of Zila Panchayat on 13-1-1997. On 13-1-1997 in all 18 elected members participated in the meeting and after debate on the motion of no confidence it was put to vote by secret ballot. Out of 18 members present and voting, 17 voted in favour of the motion whereas one member voted against it. The remaining IS members did not participate in the meeting. The meeting was presided over by learned 4th Additional District Judge, Fatehpur. The Presiding Officer passed an order on same day declaring that the motion of no confidence brought against respondent No. 3 has failed as it was not supported by more than 50% of the members as required under Section 28 (11) of the Act. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order petitioners, who are elected members of the Zila Panchayat, have filed this petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel has further sub mitted that after the meeting dated 13-1-1997 the vacancy which had occurred on account of the resignation of one member has been filled and the present strength is 34. The thrust of the submission of the learned counsel is that this subsequent event should be taken into account to con sider as to whether it is a fit case for inter ference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is submitted that this Court should not interfere on the basis of technicalities involved. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel in case of Mata Badal Pandey and another v. Board of Revenue, U. P. and others reported in 1974 U. P. T. C. 570 (FB ). LEARNED Counsel has also referred to the Words and Phrases Permanent Edition Volume 27 A wherein the word "more" has been defined.