Himangshu Sarkar & Ors vs Sohan Prasad Choudhary & Ors

The District Magistrate, North 24-Parganas at Barasat (hereafter the ‘district magistrate’) through Mr. Datta, learned Advocate General for

the respondent no. 2 has filed a report in sealed cover. The report of the district magistrate alongwith the USB drive enclosed with the report

containing a video footage of the proceedings of the meeting held on January 07, 2020 shall be retained with the records.

On perusal of the report, it appears that in compliance with the order dated January 06, 2020, the district magistrate had duly convened a meeting on

January 07, 2020 at 1.00 p.m. and notice of such meeting was duly pasted on the notice board of Bhatpara Municipality; that no notice, as directed,

was issued and pasted on the notice board by the Chairman of Bhatpara Municipality; that in such meeting, 19 out of 33 councillors of Bhatpara

Municipality were present; that the Chairman was not present in the meeting; that the President of the meeting was duly elected in the manner

required by law; that the district magistrate was present and conducted the proceedings; and that all the 19 councillors present in the meeting

expressed no confidence in the Chairman, Bhatpara Municipality. Accordingly, it was found that the Chairman had failed to prove that he had majority

support of the councillors forming the Board of Councillors of Bhatpara Municipality.

Since the resolution of no confidence has been carried and the Chairman obviously does not have the support of the majority of the councillors forming

the Board of Councillors, further steps are required to be taken in accordance with law.

We had called upon Mr. Basu, learned advocate for the respondent no.1-writ petitioner to advance his submissions. Mr. Basu says that he has nothing

further to say at this stage except that the appeal may be fixed for hearing on a subsequent date so that the questions arising for decision in such

appeal, as framed in the earlier order of January 06, 2020, may be decided finally.

In that view of the matter, we dispose of the stay application (A.S.T.A. 1 of 2020). All concerned shall henceforth proceed in accordance with law

including election of a new Chairman of the Board of Councillors.

However, any step taken during the pendency of the appeal shall abide by its result.

Since the main contesting respondent is represented and the State is also represented, service of notice of appeal on them is dispensed with.

However, notice of appeal shall be served on the erstwhile Chairman of the Bhatpara Municipality.

Requisites/postal costs for effecting service of notice of appeal shall be put in by the appellants within a week.

We are informed that the application for stay includes all the documents that were before the learned Judge at the time of consideration of the writ

petition. In such view of the matter, we do not insist for preparation of formal paper book. The application for stay shall be treated as the paper book

for use in the appeal. It is recorded that Mr. Basu has received a copy of the memorandum of appeal.

Put up the appeal on January 22, 2020 for ACO further consideration.