DIPAK CHAKRABORTY Vs. BOARD OF COUNCILLORS BHADRESWAR MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner, the Chairman of Bhadreswar Municipality, has challenged the resolution adopted on 24th March, 2012 by the councillors of the said Municipality removing him from the post. Facts which require to be considered are that the total strength of the councillors in the said Municipality is 22. Pursuant to the election in 2010, on 18th June, 2010 Board was constituted. The petitioner was elected the Chairman. Subsequent to the election of councillors and after formation of the Board, one councilior expired.

(2.) THEREFORE, at present the Board consists of 21 councillors. On 20th March, 2012, 9 councillors issued a notice for removal of the petitioner from the post of Chairman. On 24th March, 2012 10 members adopted a resolution for removal of the petitioner. Nine councillors voted against the resolution. 2 councillors abstained from voting. After resolution was passed, the petitioner addressed a letter dated 24th March, 2012, to the District Magistrate, Hooghly, the respondent no.3, being annexure P4 to the writ petition, alleging that his removal by less than fifty per cent of the elected councillors was unethical and against the scheme of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 (for short the Act), particularly section 18(3) thereof. Thereafter, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chandernagore, Hooghly, by memo dated 26th March, 2012 directed the Executive Officer of the Municipality, the respondent no.4, to take charge from the petitioner and hand over the same to the Vice-Chairman. It has been stated that on 26th March, 2012 the respondent no.4 had issued the impugned letter requesting the petitioner to hand over charge on 26th March, 2012 at 5 P.M.

(3.) THE issues which require consideration - i) Whether after amendment of section 18(3) with effect from 15th December, 2003, majority means total number of elected members present and voting or majority of the total number of elected members as contained in the proviso to the said section; ii) Whether the 10 councillors who had voted in favour of the resolution for removal of the Chairman constitute the majority of the councillors or not; iii) Whether proviso can override section 18(3) of the Act and iv) Whether proviso to section 18(3) is only with regard to the bar in removing the Chairman within six months from the date of assumption of office.