SHEOKUMAR SHASHTRI Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who was the elected Vice-President of the Rajnandgaon Municipal Committee, seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing a motion of no-confidence passed against him at a meeting of the Committee held on 21st March 1962.

(2.) THE material facts are that on 25th November 1961 Gyanchand Jain, a member of the Committee, gave to the petitioner a notice under Section 18-A (1) of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, saying that he would move a motion of no-confidence against him on the expiry of the prescribed period of ten days from the date of the receipt of notice by the petitioner. The notice also asked the petitioner, who was then officiating as President of the Municipal Committee, to convene a meeting of the Committee for the purpose. A meeting was accordingly convened on 17th January 1962. As, however, there was no quorum for the meeting, the motion of no-confidence could not be moved and the meeting was adjourned sine die. On 1st February 1962 the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 came into force. Thereafter on 13th February 1962 eight members of the Committee gave a notice to the Chief Municipal Officer of the Committee for summoning a meeting of the Committee for the purpose of taking a decision on the motion of no-confidence against the [petitioner which was said to be under consideration of the Committee. On receipt of this requisition, the President of the Committee issued to the petitioner and other members of the Committee, a notice saying that a meeting of the Committee would be held on 31st March 1962 at 8 p. m. for the discussion of the motion of no-confidence against the petitioner. This notice narrated that a meeting for this purpose had been held on 17th January 1962 but that it had to be adjourned for want of quorum and that a requisition from eight members for the convening of a meeting for taking a decision on the motion of no-confidence had been received by the Chief Municipal Officer. Accordingly a meeting of the committee was held on 31st March 1962 and the impugned resolution was passed.

(3.) THE petitioner's contention is that after the coming into force of the M. P. Municipalities Act, 1961, the motion of no-confidence could be moved and carried only in conformity with Section 47 of that Act; that according to Section 47 (2) a meeting for the purpose of Sub-section (1) of Section 47 could bet convened by the Chief Municipal Officer and not by the President; that the notice of such a meeting specifying the time and place thereof had to be despatched by the Chief Municipal Officer to every councillor ten clear days before the meeting; and that, therefore, the notice which was issued by the President on 24th March 1962 calling a meeting of the Committee an 31st March 1962 was illegal.