LAWS(PAT)-2017-3-5

NASIMA KHATOON, WIFE OF ALI IMAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA

Decided On March 10, 2017
Nasima Khatoon, Wife Of Ali Imam Resident Of Village Appellant
V/S
The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. B. K. Manglam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Amit Shrivastava, learned counsel for the State Election Commission, Mr. Ravish Chandra, learned A.C. to S.C. 6 for the State, Mr. S. Q. Hasan, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and Mr. Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 7.

(2.) Despite valid service of notice on the remaining private respondents, nobody is present to represent them.

(3.) The petitioner, who was at the relevant time holding the post of Chief Councillor of Nagar Panchayat, Sugauli, had moved the Court for quashing of order dated 05.09.2016 passed by the respondent no. 6 fixing the date of Special Meeting on 19.09.2016 for consideration of a 'No Confidence Motion' against her. During the pendency of the writ petition, the meeting was held and the 'No Confidence Motion' was carried through and thereafter another meeting was held electing the respondent no. 12 as the Chief Councillor. Due to the aforesaid developments, through subsequent amendment, the Special Meeting which was convened by the requisitionists on 24.09.2016, was also challenged. Later on, besides the State Election Commission being made a party respondent, the petitioner also challenged the proceeding of the said meeting held on 24.09.2016, by which ultimately the petitioner was removed from the post of Chief Councillor and thereafter the petitioner also challenged the notice of convening the meeting on 15.10.2016 for electing the new Chief Councillor. By order dated 09.12.2016, such election scheduled for 10.12.2016 was allowed to proceed, but results were directed not to be declared. The said order was modified by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 41 of 2017 to the extent that the authorities were allowed to declare the results pursuant to which the respondent no. 12 stood elected and is occupying the post of Chief Councillor.