S. Saghir Ahmad, J.:— This petition was disposed of by us on 22-5-1992 by a short order reading as under:—

“For the reasons to be recorded later, the writ petition is allowed and the notice convening the meeting contained in Annexure I as also the order contained in Annexure 2 by which the meeting was adjourned to 12-4-92 including the proceedings of the meeting held on 12-4-92 to consider the motion of no confidence against the petitioner an: quashed with the direction that the petitioner shall be allowed to continue as Pramukh of the Kshettra Samiti Sahabad district Hardoi without any interference by the opposite parties”.

2. We now proceed to give our reasons. The facts set out in the case indicate that the petitioner was elected Block Pramukh of the Kshettra Samiti, Sahabad, district Hardoi on 16-10-1988.

3. It may be pointed out that under the provisions of the U.P Kshettra Samities and Zila Parishads Adhiniyam, 1961 (U.P Act No. XXXIII of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the State Government is required by S. 3 to divide the rural area of each district into “Khands” by a notification. Under S. 5 of the Act there has to be a Kshettra Samiti for each Khand, the constitution or reconstitution of which is also notified by the State Government. Section 6 provides the composition of Kshettra Samiti.

4. The members indicated in S. 6 of the Act, who constitute the Kshettra Samiti, have to elect a Pramukh. It was under S. 7 of the Act that the petitioner was elected as Pramukh on 16-10-89 for a period of five years.

5. It may be pointed out that the term of the Kshettra Samiti is five years as provided in Section 8 while the term of the Pramukh is conterminous with the term of the Kshettra Samiti, as indicated in S. 9 of the Act.

6. On 14-3-92 the petitioner was served with a copy of the notice dt. 28-2-92 issued from the officer of the Collector, Hardoi intimating the petitioner that a meeting has been called on 23-3-1992 at 11.00 a.m to consider the motion of no confidence moved against him. A copy of the notice together with its annexures has been filed as Annexure 6 to the writ petition. The meeting, however, could not take place on 23-3-92 as the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Pargana Adhikari Shahabad, Hardoi, who was to preside at the meeting, could not attend the meeting on account of his illness and adjourned it to 12-4-92. It was at this stage that the petitioner filed the present writ petition in this Court on 6-4-92. The petition was directed to come up for orders on 9-4-92 so that the Standing Counsel may seek instruction.

7. On 9-4-92 the following order was passed by a Division Bench of this Court comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Brijesh Kumar and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Shobha Diskshit:—

“Heard.

List for orders in the week commencing on 27-4-92 to enable the Standing Counsel to file counter-affidavit.

The election, if any, held in the meantime shall be subject to the further orders which may be passed on the next date.”

8. Since the motion of no confidence against the petitioner was carried through in the meeting held on 12-4-92, the petitioner moved an application for amendment chal lenging also the meeting held on 12-4-92 and the result of the meeting contained in the notice dt. 12-4-92 filed as Annexure 11 to the writ petition. The amendment application was allowed and the Standing Counsel was required to file a counter-affidavit to be amended, writ petition. The Bench compri sing of Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.K Trivedi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.N Tilhari directed that the writ petition shall be listed for final hearing on 20-5-92.

9. On 20-5-92 the petition was directed to come up the next day. On 21-5-92 it was directed to come up on 22-5-92 when it was finally disposed of by us by a short order reproduced in the beginning of this judgment.

10. On 22-5-92 the Standing Counsel had produced the original record before us. Since he had not filed the counter-affidavit and since the Division Bench by its order dt. 8-5-92 had directed that the writ petition shall be listed for final hearing, we indicated the Standing Counsel and the counsel for the petitioner that we would dispose of the petition finally as the original records have been produced before us to which no objection was taken by any of the counsel for the parties appearing before us on that date.

11. Section 15 of the Act deals with the question of motion of no confidence in the Pramukh. It sets out the entire procedure which is to be followed in the matter of convening of the meeting and also the consideration of no confidence motion. Section 15 is reproduced below:—

“15. Motion of non-confidence in Pramukh or Up-Pramukh— (1) A motion expressing want of confidence in the Pramukh or any Up-Pramukh of procedure laid in the following sub-sections.

(2) A written notice of intention to make the motion, in such form as may be prescribed, signed by at least half of the total number of members of the Kshettra Samiti for the time being together with a copy of the proposed motion, shall be delivered in person, by any one of the member signing the notice, to the Collector having jurisdiction over the Kshettra Samiti.

(3) The Collector shall thereupon—

(i) convene a meeting of Shettra Samiti for the consideration of the motion at the office of the Kshettra Samiti on a date appointed by him, which shall not be later than thirty days from the date on which the notice under subsection (2) was delivered to him; and

(ii) give to the members of the Kshettra; Samiti notice of not less than fifteen days of: such meeting in such manner as may be prescribed.

Explanation— In computing the period of thirty days specified in this sub-section, the period during which a stay order, if any, issued by a competent Court on a petition filed against the motion made under this section is in force plus such further time as may be required in the issue of fresh notices of the meeting to the members, shall be excluded.

(4) The sub-divisional officer of the subdivision in which the Kshettra Samiti exercises jurisdiction shall preside at such meeting:

Provided that if the Kshettra Samiti exercises jurisdiction in more than one sub-division or sub-division officer cannot for any reason preside, any stipendiary additional or assistant collector named by the Collector shall preside at the meeting.

(4-A) If within an hour from the time appointed for the meeting such officer is not present to preside at the meeting the meeting shall stand adjourned to the date and time to be appointed by him under sub-section (4-B).

(4-B) If the officer mentioned in sub-section (4) is unable to preside at the meeting he may, after recording his reasons, adjourn the meeting to such other date and time as he may appoint, but not later than 25 days from the date so appointed for the meeting under subsection (3). He shall without delay inform the collector in writing of the adjournment of the meeting. The Collector shall give to the members at least ten days’ notice of the next meeting in the manner prescribed under subsection (3).

(5) Save as provided in sub-sections (4-A) and (4-B), a meeting convened for the purpose of considering a motion under this section shall not be adjourned.

(6) As soon as the meeting convened under this section commences, the Presiding Officer shall read to the Kshettra Samiti the motion for the consideration of which the meeting has been convened and declare it to be open for debate.

(7) No debate on the motion under this section shall be adjourned,

(8) Such debate shall automatically terminate on the expiration of two hours from the time appointed for the commencement of the meeting, if it is not concluded earlier. On the conclusion of the debate or on the expiration of the said period of two hours, whichever is earlier the motion shall be put to vote which shall be in the prescribed manner by secret ballot,

(9) The presiding officer shall not speak on the merits of the motion and he shall not be entitled to vote thereon.

(10) A copy of the minutes, of the meeting, together with a copy of the motion and the result of the voting thereon, shall be for warded forthwith on the termination of the meeting by the presiding officer to the State; Government and to the Zila Parishad having jurisdiction.

(11) If the motion is carried with the support of more than half of the total number of members of the Kshettra Samiti for the time being—

(a) the presiding officer shall cause the fact to be published by affixing a notice thereof on the notice board of the office of the Kshettra Samiti and also by notifying the same in the Gazette, and

(b) the Pramukh or Up-Pramukh, as the case may be, shall cause to hold office as such and vacate the same on and from the date next following that on which the said notice is affixed on the notice board of the office of the Kshettra Samiti.

(12) If the motion is not carried as aforesaid or if the meeting could not be held for want of quorum, no notice of any subsequent motion expressing want of confidence in the same Pramukh or Up-Pramukh shall be received until after the Expiration of two years from the date of such meeting.

(13) No notice of a motion under this section shall be received within two years of the assumption of office by a Pramukh or Up-Pramukh as the case me be.”

12. Sub-section (3) of S. 15, quoted above, indicates that the Collector has to convene the meeting of the Kshettra Samiti I for the consideration of the motion of no confidence in the Pramukh at the office of the Kshettra Samiti on a date appointed by him; of which a notice is to be given to the members of the Kshettra Samiti in such manner as may be prescribed.

(emphasis supplied)

13. The word “prescribed” has been defined in S. 2(19) as under:—

“2(19), “prescribed” means prescribed by the Act or by any rule made thereunder.”

14. The rule making power has been given to the State Government under S. 237 of the Act and it was in exercise of this provision that the State Government made the rules relating to the form in which a written notice of intention to make the motion of no confidence in Pramukh is to be given by the members of the Kshettra Samiti as also for prescribing the manner in which the Collector is to give notice of the said motion to the members of the Kshettra Samiti. R. 2 of the aforesaid rules reads as under:—

“2. The notice under clause (ii) of subsection (3) of Section 15 of the U.P Kshettra Samities and Zila Parishads Adhiniyam, 1961, shall be in form II of the Schedule given below and shall be sent by registered post to every member of the Kshettra Samiti at his ordinary place of residence. It shall also be published by affixation of a copy thereof on the notice board of the office of the Kshettra Samiti”. Form II prescribed under the Rule, referred to above, is reproduced below:—

FORM II

(Form of the notice of a meeting of the Kshettra Samiti to be held for the consideration of the non-confidence action against the Pramukh/Up-Pramukh).

Member of…………Kshettra Samiti,

District…………

NOTICE

This notice is hereby given to you of the meeting of…………Kshettra Samiti which shall be held at the office of the said Kshettra Samiti on…………(date) at…………(time) for consideration of the motion of non-confidence which has been made against Sri……………the Pramukh/Up-Pramukh of the said Kshettra Samiti.

A copy of the motion is annexed hereto.

Place…………

Date…………

Collector……………

15. A perusal of Form II, reproduced above, will indicate that the copy of the motion is to be annexed with the said Form The question raised before us, and on which; we intend to dispose of this writ petition finally, is that although the notice was issued in the prescribed form, but a complete copy of the motion of no confidence was not attached with the said Form.

16. The original record produced before us indicates that a notice dt. 27-2-92 of an intention to move a motion of no confidence was given to the Collector by 65 members of the Kshettra Samiti who had placed their signatures below the words Sadasyagan Kshettra Samiti, Shahabad Janpad Hardoi This notice is accompanied by a motion of no confidence which is also signed by the same number of members below the words Sadasyagan Kshettra Samiti, Shahabad, Janpad Hardoi. The names of all the members, who have signed the notice as also the motion of no confidence, are clearly discernible. Two of the members have placed their thumb marks on the notice but their names have been indicated immediately below or on the side of the thumb marks.

17. The original record also contains the copies of the notice of the motion which have’ been sent to various members along with the notice dt. 28-2-92 issued by the Collector, Hardoi by which it was indicated that a meeting of the Kshettra Samiti Shahabad had been convened for 23-3-92 at 11.00 a.m for consideration of the no confidence motion, but neither the copy of the motion, nor the copy of the notice contains the names of the members who has signed the notice of the motion. A copy of the notice served on the petitioner has already been filed along with? the writ petition. The names of the members, who had given notice of no confidence and who had also signed the motion, have not been indicated in the said notice. This is also borne out by the original record produced before us as the copies of the notice of intention to move the motion of no confidence as also the motion issued to the members available on the original record do not contain the names of the members who had signed the motion as also the notice.

18. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the names of the members of the Kshettra Samiti, who has signed the notice of intention to move the motion of no confidence against the petitioner as also the motion itself had not been indicated on the copy of the notice sent to him, there was a violation of the provisions of S. 15(3) read with R. 2 of the Rules made under the Act for the consideration of motion of no confidence. It is also contended that the requirement indicated in Form II that “a copy of the motion is annexed hereto” was also not complied with as the notice sent to the petitioner cannot be said to be a copy of the original motion, as the names of the persons signing the motion had not been indicated in the copy.

19. Section 15(3) is in mandatory form It consists of two parts. The first part says that the Collector shall convene a meeting of Kshettra Samiti for consideration of the motion. It further provides that the meeting shall be convened at the office of the Kshettra Samiti on a date appointed by the Collector. This date cannot be later than 30 days from the date on which the notice is delivered to the Collector under sub-sec. (2) of S. 15.

20. The second part provides that the Collector shall give notice of the meeting to all the members of the Kshettra Samiti in such manner as may be prescribed. Both the parts are mandatory in character. Since the form in which the notice is to be issued to the members of the Kshettra Samiti has been prescribed by the Rules by the State Government, the requirement that the notice shall be in that form, is also, therefore, mandatory.

21. Where the law requires thing to be done in a particular manner, that thing is to be done in that manner or not at all. This is a well known principle.

22. Examined on the touch stone of this principle, it will be seen that the notice issued to the petitioner, though on the prescribed form, was not in compliance of all the requirements prescribed by Rules in as much as the names of all the members of the Kshettra Samiti, who had signed the motion had not been indicated in the copy.

23. Learned Standing Counsel contended that the omission to indicate the names of the members, who had signed the notice of intention to make the motion of no confidence or the motion itself, would not vitiate the notice. We are not prepared to accept this contention. The requirement prescribed under the Rules is that a copy of the motion shall be sent along with the notice to the members of the Kshettra Samiti. If the original notice of the motion contains the names of the members signing or thumb marking it, it was necessary under law to indicate all the names in the notice issued to the petitioner. The original record contains the cyclostyled copies of the notice and the motion, which were sent to the members. On those two cyclostyled copies of which one set was sent to every member, the names of the members, who had signed the motion, could very well have been indicated. In any case, the present age is the age of photostat and electrostat copies. There was no difficulty in preparing the photostat or the electrostat copies of the notice of the motion so that the same could have been sent to the petitioner and other members of the Kshettra Samiti along with the notice of the meeting issued on the prescribed form, The names of the persons, who had signed the original notice and the motion, cannot be legally concealed from the Pramukh or any other member of the Kshettra Samiti. When the law requires that the copy of the motion shall be sent to all the members of the Kshettra Samiti, it implies that full contents of the motion shall be brought to the notice of the members. If the names of the members of the Kshettra Samiti, who had signed the motion, are not disposed to the members of the Kshettra Samiti to whom notices of the date for which the meeting has been convened for considering the motion of no confidence, are sent, it cannot be said that the provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder have been complied with.

24. Since in the instant case we have found it as a fact that where the copy of the motion issued to the petitioner along with the notice for the date on which the meeting was convened was not a complete copy inasmuch as the names of the members of the Kshettra Samiti, who had signed the original motion were not mentioned in the copy sent to him and had thereby been concealed from him, there was total non-compliance of the provisions of S. 15(3) read with the Rules made by the State Government under Section 237 of the Act, which were notified (by the State Government) on 14-12-62. Since the steps indicated in S. 15(3) had not been properly taken by the Collector and there was noncompliance of the legal requirements, all subsequent steps and actions become invalid and cannot be sustained. For the reasons indicated above, the writ petition is allowed and the notice convening the meeting contained in Annexure I as also the order contained in Annexure 2 by which the meeting was adjourned to 12-4-92 including the proceedings of the meeting held on 12-4-92 to consider the motion of no confidence against the petitioner are quashed with the direction that the petitioner shall be allowed to Continue as pramukh of the Kshettra Samiti, Shahabad, district Hardoi without any interference by the opposite parties.

25. Petition allowed.