IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.854 of 2010
IN
CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.12424 OF 2009
============================================
LAXMAN CHAURASIA - Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS - Respondent(s)
============================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Prem Kumar Verma
Mr.Krishna Bihari
Mr. Arbind Kumar
Mr. Rajendra Kumar Dubey
For The Respondents : Mr. (GP19)
Mr. R.S.Pradhan
Mr. Santosh Kumar
Mr. Pushkar Narayan Shahi
Mr. Nityanand Mishra
===========================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2. 23.9.2010. This appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the
Letters Patent arises from the order dated 1st April 2010 made
by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No.12424 of 2009.
The appellant is the writ petitioner. He was elected
Mayor of Ara Municipal Corporation. He has challenged the
election of the Mayor of the Corporation held on 20th July
2009.
It is the case of the appellant that he was elected as
Mayor in the year 2007. Another Mayor could not have been
2
elected while the appellant was Mayor of the Corporation.
It is alleged that the election of the Mayor was held
on 20th July 2009 on account of the resignation allegedly
tendered by the appellant. The appellant has disputed the
factum of his tendering resignation.
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ
petition as the appellant did not question the election
programme declared on 7th July 2009; nor did he challenge
the election held on 20th July 2009 for two months thereafter.
Therefore, the present appeal.
Learned Advocate Mr. Prem Kumar Verma has
appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that appellant’s
purported resignation was returned by the Divisional
Commissioner. Thus, even if the resignation were tendered, it
was not operative. In support thereof, he has relied upon
section 25(2) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007.
We are not able to accept the arguments advanced
before us. The resignation in question was tendered by the
appellant on 24th June, 2009. The submission that the
Divisional Commissioner did not accept the resignation and
returned it, is fallacious. On 25th June 2009 the resignation
was forwarded for further action, in case it were not
3
withdrawn within seven days. Admittedly the appellant did
not withdraw the resignation. In view of Section 25(3)(2) of
the Act, it had become effective on expiry of seven days i.e
on 1st July 2009.
In our opinion, the learned Single Judge has rightly
considered the conduct of the appellant and held that the
appellant had indeed tendered the resignation. No case for
interference is made out.
The appeal is dismissed in limine.
(R. M. Doshit, CJ)
(Jyoti Saran, J)
ahk
