Bal Raj Tuli, J. - (1.) THE Petitioner was elected as a Primary Member of the Panchayat Samiti, Jind, in January, 1965. Thereafter he was elected Chairman of the said Samiti on February 16, 1965. On January 18, 1968, some members of the Panchayat Samiti sent a requisition to Respondent No. 6, who was the Vice -President of the Samiti, for convening a meeting of the Panchayat Samiti under Section 18(1) of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act), for considering their motion requiring the Petitioner to vacate the office of the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti. Respondent No. 6 summoned a meeting of the Panchayat Samiti for January 31, 1968, at 2.30 p.m. for considering that motion. Notices of the meeting were issued by Respondent No. 6 on January 19, 1968. The Petitioner filed a civil suit in the Court of Subordinate Judge, 1st Class, Jind, on January 29, 1968, for permanent injunction against all the members of the Panchayat Samiti, Jind, restraining them from holding the meeting summoned for January 31, 1968. The learned Subordinate Judge granted an ad -interim injunction and Respondent No. 7 filed an application for vacating the same on January 30, 1968. That application was fixed for arguments on the following day. During the course of the arguments the Petitioner tendered his resignation and thus no meeting was held on January 31, 1968. He, however, withdrew his resignation the following day on the ground that it had been obtained from him under coercion and undue influence by misrepresenting the facts.
(2.) ON February 5, 1968, eleven members of the Panchayat Samiti again sent a motion under Rule 3 of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis (Vacation of Office by Chairman and Vice -Chairman) Rules, 1963, for the removal of the Petitioner from the office of the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti, Jind. On receipt of this requisition, Respondent No. 6 issued notices to all the members on February 6, 1968, for the meeting to be held on February 14, 1968. Notices to five members were served personally and to the others notices are alleged to have been sent under certificates of posting. The Petitioner filed an application in the Court of the Subordinate Judge where his suit was pending for an ad -interim injunction restraining the members of the Samiti from holding any meeting on February 14, 1968. On February 13, 1968, in the early hours of the day, the learned Subordinate Judge granted ad -interim injunction, but vacated the same in the afternoon on an application made by Respondent No. 7. The meeting was thus held on February 14, 1968, as summoned, and all the members excepting the Petitioner attended the same. There were in all twenty -five regular members and two ex -officio members, out of which twenty -four regular members and two ex -officio members attended. They passed unanimously the resolution removing the Petitioner from the office of the Chairman. In his place, Respondent No. 7 was unanimously elected as the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti. The election of Respondent No. 7 as Chairman was gazetted on the following day, The Petitioner then filed the present writ petition in this Court on February 28, 1968, which was admitted on the following day, but stay was refused. Returns to the writ petition have been filed by Respondents No. 2, 5, 6, 7 and 19 and by Respondent No. 17 on behalf of Respondent No. 8 to 29.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner has argued that the meeting held on February 14, 1968, was neither valid nor legal, as it contravened the mandatory provisions of the Act and the Rules. The learned Counsel has referred to Sections 17 and 20 of the Act. Section 17 provides for the manner of the election of the Chairman and Vice -Chairman when the Panchayat Samiti is constituted and Section 20 provides that the provisions of Section 17 will apply to the election of Chairman or Vice -Chairman on the occurrence of any vacancy in that office otherwise than in the manner specified in Section 18 or Section 19 of the Act. Section 18 provides that if by a resolution passed by not less than two -thirds of the total number of its members the Panchayat Samiti decides at a meeting, convened in the manner prescribed, that he shall vacate his office, the Chairman or Vice -Chairman shall cease to hold that office, and in such a case the Panchayat Samiti shall elect a new Chairman or Vice -Chairman at the same meeting at which the aforesaid resolution is passed. It is thus evident that the manner of election provided in Section 17 does not apply to the election of Chairman or Vice -Chairman when either is removed by resolution passed by the Samiti. The Petitioner had been removed from the office of the Chairman under Section 18 and the new Chairman in his place had to be elected at that meeting. It cannot, therefore, be held that this meeting for the election of a new Chairman in place of the Petitioner had to be summoned by the Deputy Commissioner in accordance with Section 17 of the Act and that the Vice -Chairman could not summon the meeting or preside over it. I, therefore, find no force in this argument of the learned Counsel.;