Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Mr. P. K. Sahi, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner has centered his arguments submitting that a conjoint reading of second proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 25 of the Act of 2007 would show that a Chief Councillor may be re- Patna High Court CWJC No.5258 of 2019 dt.22-07-2019 moved from his office by resolution carried by a majority of whole number of Councillors holding office for the time being at a Special Meeting which is to be called for in the given man- ner upon a requisition made in the writing by not less than 1/3 rd of total number of the Councillors. The first proviso clearly stipulates that a No Confidence Motion shall not be brought against the Chief Councillor / Deputy Chief Councillor within a period of 2 years from taking over the charge of the post. Ac- cording to learned Senior Counsel, the moment a requisition is made in writing by the given number of the Councillors, it amounts to bringing a 'No Confidence Motion', therefore, by virtue of the first proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 25 of the Act of 2007 no requisition for a 'No Confidence Motion' shall be brought within two years. Extending his argument, learned Senior Counsel further submits that the second proviso should be read in consonance with the entire scheme of sub-section 4 of Section 25 of the Act of 2007. According to the second proviso, a No Confidence Motion shall not be brought again within one year of the first No Confidence Motion. According to the learned Senior Counsel the cluster of words "first No Confi- dence Motion" has to be understood as if once a requisition has been made for bringing a No Confidence Motion after the re- Patna High Court CWJC No.5258 of 2019 dt.22-07-2019 striction of two years ends, it would amount to "the first No Confidence Motion" and therefore the moment the requisition was withdrawn in this case on 14.02.2019, the consequences of the second proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 25 of the Act of 2007 shall follow.

This Court regrets it's inability to agree with the sub- missions of learned Senior Counsel that if his interpretation is not accepted then sword of No Confidence Motion shall keep on Patna High Court CWJC No.5258 of 2019 dt.22-07-2019 hanging against a duly elected Chief Councillor /Deputy Chief Councillor. This Court is of the view that unless a requisition for fixing a Special Meeting to move No Confidence Motion re- sults in convening and holding of the Special Meeting it cannot be said to be a 'No Confidence Motion' brought as envisaged under the second proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 25 of the Act of 2007. The word 'brought again' as occurring in the sec- ond proviso is a word of significance hence it must be given it's full meaning. Withdrawal of a requisition even before it results in actual moving of the No Confidence Motion before the House cannot be said to be a 'No Confidence Motion' brought. Rule 2(v) of the No Confidence Motion Process Rules, 2010 talks of reading out the motion on which the Meeting has been called before the Members present and declare it open for discussion.