CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, J. ( 1 ) SINCE common question of law is involved in these two Writ petitions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of by a common order. ( 2 ) THE facts in these two cases are as follows:the petitioner in W. P. No. 4728/2003 is the elected President of the third respondent - Kadur Municipal Council. Seventeen councillors to the Kadur Municipal Council submitted a representation to the President on 9. 1. 2003 to call for the meeting to consider the motion of no confidence moved against the petitioner. On the basis of this representation the Chief Officer called a special general meeting on 30. 1. 2003 by notice dated 21. 1. 2003. Accordingly, the special meeting was held on 30. 1. 2003. 28 councillors attended the said meeting. Out of 28, 17 councillors voted in favour of the motion whereas, 7 councillors voted against the motion. On the basis of the said resolution the official memorandum dated 5. 2. 2003 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Chickmagalur District, Chickmagalur, stating that the motion has been carried by 2/3rds majority and accordingly, declared the post of President as vacant. This has been called in question by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. ( 3 ) THE total number of members of the Kadur Municipal Councilconsists of 30. Out of 30, 23 are elected, 5 nominated and one MLA and one MP. The contention of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that out of the total number of members of the Municipal Council, the persons voted in favour of the motion are only 17 and as 17 councillors do not represent 2/3rds of the total number of members of the municipal council present in the meeting, the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner as per Annexure-G is illegal. ( 4 ) THE petitioner in W. P. 5939/2003 is the elected President ofthe second respondent. Town Municipal Council, Sira, 1/3rd of the total number of members of the Sira Municipal council gave a notice requesting to call for a special general meeting of the Municipal council to consider the motion of no confidence. On that' notice a meeting was called on 30. 2. 2003 to consider the motion of no confidence. In the said meeting 24 municipal councillors participated. Out of 24 municipal councillors, 14 persons voted in favour of the motion whereas, 5 persons voted against the motion. On that' notice a meeting was called on 30. 2. 2003 to consider the motion of no confidence. In the said meeting 24 municipal councillors participated. Out of 24 municipal councillors, 14 persons voted in favour of the motion whereas, 5 persons voted against the motion. On the basis of these proceedings the Chief Officer of the Municipal Council issued a notification stating that the motion of no confidence was carried by 2/3rds majority and accordingly, ordered removal of the petitioner from the post of Adhyaksha. This notification and the resolution are called in question by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. ( 5 ) THE total number of municipal councillors of the Municipalcouncil. Sira is 30. Out of 30, 23 are elected, 5 are nominated. One mla and one MP. But, the persons present in the special general meeting were 19 elected and 5 nominated. Out of 24, as stated earlier, 14 persons voted in favour of the motion and 5 persons voted against the motion. According to the petitioner 14 persons who voted in favour of the resolution do not constitute 2/3rds of the total number of members present in the meeting and therefore, the resolution and the notification are illegal. ( 6 ) THE questions that arise for consideration in these two Writpetitions are as follows:-i) Whether the nominated members of the municipal council who were present in the meeting and who have no right to vote in the meeting are to be counted for the purpose of quantifying the 2/3rds of the total number of councillors? ii) Is 2/3rds of the total number of members of the municipal Council, as provided under Section 11 of the act or the persons who were present at the special meeting to be taken in view of the word "at" found in section 42 (g) of the Act. ii) Is 2/3rds of the total number of members of the municipal Council, as provided under Section 11 of the act or the persons who were present at the special meeting to be taken in view of the word "at" found in section 42 (g) of the Act. Point No. 1:- section 2 (4) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act 1964 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) defines the word 'city Municipal Council' as follows:- "city Municipal Council" means a city municipal council established under this Act; section 2 (6) of the Act defines the word 'councillor' as follows:- 'councillor' means any person who is legally a member of the municipal council (or Town Panchayat) section 2 (14) of the Act defines the word 'municipal council' as follows:- 2 (14) "municipal Council" means the council of a town or city established under this Act; section 11 of the Act reads as follows:-11. Constitution of municipal councils (1) The municipal Council shall consist of - (a) such number of directly elected councilors specified in column (3) of the table below in respect of the municipal areas specified in the corresponding entries in column (2) thereof, namely -