ABDUL LATIF NOMANI Vs. COMMISSIONER GORAKHPUR
LAWS(ALL)-1966-5-14
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 12,1966

ABDUL LATIF NOMANI Appellant
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER GORAKHPUR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KERSHAW V. SHOREDITCH CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
SOUTH BRITISH FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE CO. NEW ZEALAND V. BRAJA NATH SHAHA [REFERRED TO]
RIDGE V. BALDWIN [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD V. P.N.SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
EBRAHIM VADIR MAVAT V. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
RAM SWARUP VS. SHIKAR CHAND [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

S L KAPOOR VS. JAGMOHAN LT GOVERNOR [LAWS(DLH)-1980-5-19] [REFERRED]
HARIHAR PANDEY VS. MANGALA PRASAD SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-1985-5-67] [REFERRED TO]
SATISH CHAND SHARMA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2004-1-143] [REFERRED TO]
MUNNA LAL GUPTA CHAIRMAN NAGAR PANCHAYAT S O SHRI LAKHAN LAL GUPTA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2005-5-221] [REFERRED TO]
MUJEEB AHMED KHAN VS. SADAR ANJUMAN E ISLAMIA HYD [LAWS(APH)-2001-9-163] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. KADRI MILLS COIMBATORE LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-1976-8-40] [REFERRED TO]
RADHAKRISHNAN L R VS. JOINT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES [LAWS(KER)-2008-4-35] [REFERRED TO]
L R RADHAKRISHANA VS. JOINT REGUSTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES [LAWS(KER)-2008-4-20] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRASAD MALI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-8-42] [REFFERED TO 10]
SARANAN MONDAL VS. BEJOY BHUSHAN GHOSH [LAWS(CAL)-1979-3-31] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Pathak, J. - (1.)THE Municipal Board of Maunath Bhanjan in the district of Azamgarh consists of the President and twenty elected members. Written notice of the intention to make a motion of non-confidence against the appellant Abdul Latif Nomani. President of the Board, was presented to the District Magis-trate, Azamgarh, on May 30, 1966, and the District Magistrate convened a meeting on July 3. 1966, for consideration of the motion. Notice of the meeting was despatched to the members of the Board by registered post on May 31, 1966 It appears that on June 10, 1966 the Commissioner of the Gorakhpur Division issued a notice to Sanaullah Sardar and Mohammad Yusuf. two members of the Board, purporting to charge them with absence from four consecutive meetings of the Board on different dates without obtaining the sanction of the Board and calling upon them to enter a statement of their defence by June 26, 1966. On July 1 1966, the Commissioner made an order removing Sanaullah Sardar and Mohammad Yusuf from membership of the Board. The meeting for consideration of the motion of non- confidence was held on July 3, 1966. It was presided over by Sri. B. N Misra, Additional Civil Judge. Eleven members of the Board, including Sanaullah Sardar and Mohammad Yusuf. who had signed the notice of intention to make the motion, were present. Upon examination of the members 'list, the judicial officer discovered that Sanaullah Sardar and Mohammad Yusuf were not shown therein and thereupon, he directed them to leave the meeting. They made an application to the judicial officer urging that thev had not been removed in accordance with law and that effect should not be given to the order of the Commissioner and they should be considered as continuing members of the Board. The judicial officer, however, rejected the application. The other members present also requested the judicial officer to permit Sanaullah Sardar and Mohammad Yusuf to participate in the meeting but that request was also turned down. Then the judicial officer declared that the meeting could not be held for want of a quorum and recorded a minute to that effect.
(2.)SANAULLAH Sardar tiled a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the quashing of the order of the Commissioner removing him from membership of the Board and of the minute of the judicial officer that the meeting for consideration of the motion of non-confidence could not be held for want of a quorum He also prayed that the District Magistrate and the judicial officer be directed to hold a meeting of the Board for consideration of the motion of non-confidence on the basis of the notice of intention already delivered.
A similar petition was moved by Mohammad Yusuf praying for like relief

(3.)BOTH the petitions were disposed of together by G. C. Mathur, J. He rejected the plea of the petitioners that the order removing them from membership of the Board was made mala fide but he held that the order of removal did not satisfy the provisions of Section 40(1)(a) of the U. P Municipalities Act and was, therefore, invalid En passant he observed that Sanaullah Sardar and Mohammad Yusuf had not been given an opportunity of explanation as contemplated by Section 40(4) He quashed the orders of removal made by the Commissioner on July 1, 1966. Then pointing out that but for the invalid orders of removal the petitioners would have participated in the meeting convened for the consideration of the motion of non-confidence and that there would then have been a quorum for holding the meeting he directed the District Magistrate to reconvene a meeting of the Board for consideration of the motion on the basis of the notice of intention which had already been received by him on May 30, 1966.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.