CHINTA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing the resolution dated 7.1.2003 of the Panchayat Samiti, Tarari whereby motion of no confidence has been carried out against the petitioner.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner happens to be the Pramukh of Panchayat Samiti, Tarari. A requisition to convene the special meeting to consider the no confidence motion was given to her. For one or the other reasons, she did not convene the special meeting and thereafter 13 members decided to call the meeting on 31.12.2002 and requested the Executive Officer of the Panchayat Samiti to issue notice. In compliance of the said order, the Executive Officer of the Panchayat Samiti sent notice dated 1.1 2003 intimating to the members that 7.1.2003 is the date fixed for holding the special meeting to consider the no confidence motion against the petitioner The meeting as directed was held and no confidence motion was passed against the petitioner.

(3.) Mr. Verma, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, raises a very short point. He submits that the notice does not conform to the requirement of seven days clear notice as provided under Section 44 (4) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act. He points out that notice was sent on 1.1.2003 whereas the date of the meeting fixed was 7.1.2003 and thus, notice did not give seven clear days for holding the special meeting. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Rambha Sinha v. The State of Bihar and Ors., 2004 (2) PLJR 629 and my attention has been drawn to the following passage of para-8 of the said judgment which reads as follows :