2021 Supreme(SC) 465

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. NAGESWARA RAO, B.R. GAVAI, JJ.
SANJAY RAMDAS PATIL - APPELLANT
VERSUS
SANJAY AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
CIVIL APPEAL NO.5060-5063 OF 2021 [ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) NO. 7556-7558, 8870 OF 2021]
DECIDED ON : 01-09-2021

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Reservation of Office of Mayor in Municipal Corporation – Legislative intent is to exclude Corporations which were earlier reserved for a particular category until all categories are provided reservation.
(2) It is duty of Court to construe Statute as a whole. One provision of Act has to be construed with reference to other provisions so as to make a consistent enactment of whole Statute.
(3) Interpretation which brings about effect of result, will have to be preferred than one which defeats purpose of enactment.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India – Article 243T – Reservation – Office of Mayor in Dhule Municipal Corporation – Scheme of Rules which is in tune with Section 19(1A) of said Act and in turn with constitutional provision under Article 243T, is to provide reservation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in proportion to total population of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Municipal Corporation areas – Insofar as Backward Class is concerned, reservation provided is fixed at 27% of total number of offices of Mayors. 1/3rd of total number of posts shall be reserved for women category including one belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Class of Citizens – Dominant intent of said Rules is to give effect to reservation policy while ensuring that reservations are not repeated in particular Corporations and at the same time in all Corporations, there shall be reservation, at some point of time, for all eligible categories by rotation – Legislative intent is to exclude Corporations which were earlier reserved for a particular category until all categories are provided reservation – However, while doing so, Court will have to interpret Rule 3 of Rules in such a manner that this scheme is made workable and not frustrated – Interpretation as placed by High Court, would not make the Rules workable and give effect to legislative intent – Judgment and order passed by Bombay High Court quashed and set aside. [Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 – Section 19 (1A); Maharashtra Municipal Corporations (Reservation of Offices of Mayors) Rules, 2006 – Rule 3] (Paras 19, 38 and 42)

(B) Interpretation of Statute – Rules of Construction – It is duty of Court to construe Statute as a whole – One provision of Act has to be construed with reference to other provisions so as to make a consistent enactment of whole Statute – It is duty of Court to avoid a head-on clash between two sections and construe provisions which appear to be in conflict with each other in such a manner so as to harmonise them – While interpreting a particular statutory provision, it should not result into making other provision a “useless lumber” or a “dead letter” – While construing provisions, Court will have to ascertain intention of law-making authority in backdrop of dominant purpose and underlying intendment of Statute – Court will have to prefer an interpretation which makes the Statute workable – Interpretation which gives effect to intention of Legislature, will have to be preferred – Interpretation which brings about effect of result, will have to be preferred than one which defeats purpose of enactment. (Paras 31 and 38)

Facts of the case:

All these appeals take exception to the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad dated 7th May 2021, thereby allowing the writ petition being Writ Petition No.14440 of 2019, filed by respondent No.1 Sanjay Sudhakar Jadhav and setting aside the Notification dated 27th November 2019 in respect of Dhule Municipal Corporation, vide which Office of Mayor in Dhule Municipal Corporation for the term commencing from June, 2021 was reserved for Backward Class category. The High Court further directed the State of Maharashtra to reconsider the reservation process for the office of Mayor in Dhule Municipal Corporation in accordance with observations made by it in the judgment.

Findings of Court:

Unfortunately, for the writ petitioner, even for the present term, Dhule Municipal Corporation was also in the pool of eligible Corporations for draw of lots for Scheduled Castes category. However, in the draw, it could not be reserved for Scheduled Castes. Only thereafter, Dhule Municipal Corporation was considered in the pool of draw of lots for Backward Class of Citizens. This was so because in the immediate preceding elections, the office of Mayor was not reserved for Backward Class of Citizens.

Result : Appeals allowed.