KISHWAR NASIM @ KISHWAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main submission, apart from others, of learned counsel for the petitioner is thai the notice fixing the date of meeting for "No Confidence" motion for 27.8.2G0S did not contain any reasons/ charges which are the mandatory requirements under Section 44(3)(v) of theB ihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 .

(2.) HOWEVER , admittedly, the requisition did contain the charges/reasons and the same has come to the notice of the petitioner both by registered post as well as on the requisition being put up before her by the Executive Officer -cum - Biock Development Officer. This Court has referred another similar matter, namely, CWJC No. 10605/2008 (Radhe Raman vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) to a Division Bench in view of the points being decided to the contrary by another singie Judge Bench of this Court in a judgment reported in 2005(4) PLJR 112. In the aforesaid circumstances, this case is also referred to a Division Bench to be heard alongwith CWJC No. 10605/2008.

(3.) LET this case be placed before the appropriate Division Bench after obtaining the orders of Hon ble the Chief Justice.