As per case facts, a no-confidence motion was moved against the appellant. In a special meeting, out of nine members, only eight were present. Six voted in favor and two ... against. However, one of the members who voted in favor was disqualified for not submitting her caste certificate, rendering her ineligible to vote. The Addl. Collector approved the motion, and the High Court dismissed the appellant's Writ Petition, leading to this appeal. The question arose whether the two-thirds majority for passing a no-confidence motion should be computed based on the total members entitled to sit and vote, considering disqualification, and whether a fractional vote like 5.33 should be rounded down or up when the statute requires "not less than" a specific number. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that the disqualified member's vote cannot be computed for the motion or the majority calculation. It held that 'not less than 5.33 votes' cannot be rounded off to 5; rather, a fraction must be treated as one vote, requiring at least 6 votes. Therefore, the no-confidence motion was not validly passed against the appellant, and the High Court's judgment was erroneous.