Writ Petition (C) No. 1534/2013. Case: Gobinda Mandal Vs State of Assam. Guwahati High Court
| Case Number | Writ Petition (C) No. 1534/2013 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S.K. Goswami and P.K. Sharma, Advocates and For Respondents: R.K. Bora, Govt. Advocate, M. Hazarika, K. Choudhury, D. Choudhury, A.K. Choudhury, M. Choudhury and T. Ali, Advocates |
| Judges | Tinlianthang Vaiphei, J. |
| Issue | Civil Procedure Code |
| Judgement Date | July 17, 2014 |
| Court | Guwahati High Court |
Judgment:
Tinlianthang Vaiphei, J.
1. The legality of the order contained in the letter dated 18-8-2012 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Urban Development Department (respondent 1) holding that the resolution dated 21-4-2012 removing the respondent No. 3 from the Chairmanship of Nalbari Municipal Board was untenable inasmuch as the Assam Municipal (Amendment) Act, 2012 requiring such removal by more than half of the whole number of the Commissioners was not fulfilled, is called into question in this writ petition.
2. So much of the facts as are necessary for disposal of this writ petition may be referred to at the outset. The petitioner is an elected Commissioner of Nalbari Municipal Board ("the Board" for short), which has altogether 12 elected Commissioners with two ex-officio Members, namely, the local MLA and one local MP. According to the petitioner, when the respondent 3 indulged in corrupt and other illegal activities in contravention of the provisions of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956 ("the Act"), some of the Commissioners on 27-3-2014 submitted a requisition for convening a Special Meeting under Section 43(2) of the Act to move a Motion of No-confidence against him, but he refused to do so. Aggrieved by this, some of the Commissioners issued another notice upon the respondent 3 on 12-4-2012 expressing their dissatisfaction with his conduct. On receipt of the notice, respondent 3 on the same day gave his reply without mentioning anything regarding the holding of the Special Meeting. This prompted the Commissioners to call the Special Meeting under Section 43(3) of the Act on 21-4-2012 to discuss the No-Confidence Motion against respondent 3; the notice was duly received by him on 27-3-2012. The respondent 3, however, failed/refused to call the special meeting whereupon the notice for the Special Meeting was issued on 17-4-2012 by showing the date of the meeting as 21-4-2012 at 11 AM at Nalbari Municipal premises. The notice was given to each of the Commissioners as well as ex-officio members including the respondent No. 3, who acknowledged the receipt thereon on 17-4-2012. The meeting notice was also publicised in the Office of the Nalbari Municipal Board as well as the local newspaper. Thus, according to the petitioner, the date of the Special Meeting to fixed for 21-4-2012 was known to all the Commissioners and the ex-officio members. The meeting, attended by six Commissioners and one ex-officio member, was accordingly held on 21-4-2012 with the subject being "Removal of Chairman under Section 28(2)" of the Act: three resolutions were unanimously passed by all the six commissioners and one ex-officio member present in the meeting. The respondent No. 3 was accordingly removed from the post of Chairman of the Board with immediate effect and the Vice-Chairman (Sri Baneshwar Das) was given the responsibility to run the office of the Chairman of the Board till a new Chairman was elected.
3. It is the contention of Mr. SK Goswamy, the learned counsel for the petitioner that when the said...
To continue reading
Request your trial