source:telegraphindia.com<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The high court on Monday\n started hearing on Bidhannagar mayor Sabyasachi Dutta\u2019s petition that \nchallenged the legality of a no-confidence motion moved against him \nallegedly by some councillors of the municipal corporation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice\n Samapti Chatterjee asked the mayor to serve a notice on the \ncorporation\u2019s chairperson Krishna Chakrabarty asking her to take part in\n the case and said the hearing would continue on Tuesday.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Moving \nthe petition on behalf of Dutta, senior advocate and former Calcutta \nmayor Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya said the Trinamul government had \nviolated municipal rules while trying to remove his client from his post\n and arbitrarily issued the notice of no-confidence motion against him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe\n petitioner (Dutta) had taken several steps against the people engaged \nin unauthorised constructions and filling of wetlands in and around \nBidhannagar. Hence, some people close to a section of senior leaders of \nthe ruling party became his enemies. My client had repeatedly informed \nthe urban development minister Firhad Hakim but no action was taken \nagainst the culprits,\u201d Bhattacharyya said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bhattacharyya said only the chairperson of a municipal \ncorporation could issue a notification on a no-trust motion. \u201cA person \ncalled Surajit Ghosh has issued the notification on behalf of the \ncommissioner of the (Bidhannagar municipal) corporation, who is on leave\n at present,\u201d said the lawyer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sources said Ghosh had been \nappointed the deputy commissioner of the civic body just before the \nissuance of the non-confidence notice. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bhattacharyya asked the court to quash the notification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Advocate\n general Kishore Dutta claimed the notification of the no-confidence \nmotion had been issued in accordance with municipal rules. \u201cThe \ncommissioner of the corporation has the authority to issue a \nno-confidence motion notice,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The AG said the petition should not be maintained by the court as he did not make councillors parties to the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe\n councillors of the corporation had demanded a no-confidence motion \nagainst the petitioner. So, the deputy commissioner issued the notice. \nHence, the councillors should also be made parties to the case,\u201d the AG \nsaid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bhattacharyya then said: \u201cThe petitioner still does not know\n which councillors moved the no-confidence motion. How can he make them \nparties to the case. The petitioner should know the names of those \ncouncillors. He should be given a chance to talk to them and ask them \nabout the reasons behind their lack of confidence in him.\u201d<\/p>\n