Local Government—Removal of Chairman of Union Parishad—No-confidence motion passed for such removal—Absence of rules prescribing the manner of convening the meeting to consider the non-confidence motion cannot defeat the very purpose for which sub-section (3) of section 13 of the Local Government Ordinance, 1976 has been enacted by the legislature. Md. Habibur Rahman and others Vs. Hasan Ali Mondal and others, 2BLD (AD)31

Local Government—Criminal proceeding against the Chairman of a Union Parishad—There can be no suspension of the Chairman without application of mind and formation of requisite opinion by the prescribed authority.
Section 73 (I) of the Ordinance requires that on an application of mind to the criminal proceeding the Prescribed Authority has to form an opinion whether the Chairman’s functioning is desirable from the administrative point of view or whether it is prejudical to the interest of the Parishad. On forming such opinion it is to be so expressed and the order of suspension is to be passed with prior approval of the Government The order must show that the Prescribed Authority formed his opinion on either of the two grounds. The alternative grounds set out in the section postulates application of the mind of the authority on materials from which a rational opinion could be formed. Md. Abdul Hye Bhuiyan Vs. Secretary, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development and Co-operative and others, 1 BLD (AD) 196.

Section 91 of the Ordinance in clear terms has provided that no suit shall be instituted against a local parishad or against any member, officer or employee of a local parishad in respect of any act done or purporting to be done in official capacity, until the expiration of one month next after notice in writing has been, in the case of local parishad.
There is no consequential provision for non-service of the notice. But when the language of the section absolutely prohibits institution of the suit without prior notice, the suit becomes still-born and has to be buried at its institution. I could not but therefore hold that the provision is mandatory.
Since the provision of section 91 of the Ordinance was not complied with the suit was not maintainable. .....District Council, Feni =VS= Feni Alia Madrasha Mosque Committee, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 155] ....View Full Judgment