B.D. Agrawal, D.S. Sinha, JJ. - (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) The admitted position which transpires is that the notice to move no-confidence motion against the petitioner holding the office of the Pradhan was given on October 14, 1986. The meeting, at which the petitioner is alleged by The other side to have been ousted on the motion of no-confidence being carried out, took place admittedly on November 28, 1986. In terms of Rule 33-B (2) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, the meeting has to be convened not later than 30 days from the date of the receipt of the notice. This, in our view, is mandatory taking into account the negative language in which it is placed and also the object behind the proviso. Since the meeting in this case took place later than 30 days from the date when the notice was received, the petitioner cannot be said to have been lawfully ousted as a result thereof from the office held by him. The notice is rendered ineffectual on this account.
(3.) The petition succeeds accordingly. The notice dated 14th October, 1986 and the proceedings in pursuance thereof (including the proceeding held at the meeting dated 28th November, 1986) are quashed. Petition allowed.;