Majority threshold for no-confidence motions under municipal law means more than half of total membership, without artificial rounding.

Section 87-A(12) of the U.P. Municipalities Act was interpreted to mean that a no-confidence motion is carried when votes in favour exceed half of the total membership, and no artificial rounding of an odd total is permitted. Applying that construction, the Court treated eight votes out of fifteen as sufficient because they amounted to more than half of the board's strength. The provision's use of the phrase "more than half" was held deliberate and not redundant, so the motion was validly carried and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether under Section 87-A(12) of the U.P. Municipalities Act a no-confidence motion against the President of a Municipal Board with 15 members is validly carried when eight members vote in favour, and whether the words "more than half" require treating nine votes as necessary.

Analysis: The language of Section 87-A(12) was read in the light of the legislative history of the provision and the repeated use of qualifying expressions such as "more than half" in analogous provisions. The Court held that the words "more than half" were deliberate and not redundant. It rejected the contention that one-half of 15 must first be artificially rounded to 8 and then increased to 9. The emphasis, according to the Court, is on the number of votes cast in favour, and 8 out of 15 is itself more than half of the total membership.

Conclusion: Eight votes in favour satisfied Section 87-A(12); the no-confidence motion was validly carried and the writ petition failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute requires a motion to be carried by a majority of more than half of the total number of members, the requirement is satisfied by any number exceeding half of the total membership, and no artificial rounding of an odd total is permissible.

---