JUDGMENT: (PER Hon'ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao)

The petitioner herein, who is a Mayor of the Municipal Corporation of Nellore files this writ petition seeking for a Mandamus declaring the action of the Government in initiating proceedings to remove her from the said office, as illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and further vitiated by malice in law and tainted with mala fides while seeking a declaration primarily that Section 639-B of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1956 as unconstitutional, consequently to hold that the action of the government in initiating the impugned proceedings vide Memo No.6929/Elec.II/2008, dated 13-06- 2008 as void and to set aside the same.

The facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that the petitioner was elected as Corporator from Ward No.38 of the Nellore Municipal Corporation in the elections held on 24-09-2005 and subsequently she got elected unanimously to the post of Mayor in the election, conducted on 30-9-2005. She has taken charge on 5-10-2005 and thus the term of the office comes to an end on 29-09-2010. She states that there are in all 50 Wards in the Municipality; of which Congress won 19, TDP-20, Independents-5, C.P.M-4 and BJP-2, apart from four Ex-officio members viz., one Member of Parliament and three members of Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, including the 3rd respondent herein. She takes to her credit about several developmental activities taken up for the betterment of the city by procuring substantial funds.

However, she states that the 3rd respondent, who is MLA from local Nellore Assembly Constituency and Ex- officio member of the Corporation, along with his henchmen, is trying to create hurdles for no fault of her. It is only in pursuance of such avowed motive, the impugned show-cause notice dated 13-6-2008 is being given, which is served on her on 14-6-2008. In the said notice, certain charges have been alleged to the effect that she is not discharging the duties legitimately and willfully omitted to carry out the provisions of the Act and Rules made there under, and that she has abused the powers vested in the office as Mayor and called upon to give explanation within 7 days. According to her, all those allegations and charges are totally vague and do not have any basis and are invented only for the purpose of removing her from the post.

Therefore, she has filed the present writ petition, inter alia seeking to assail the constitutional validity of Section 679-B of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act under which the said action is initiated and consequently to set aside the same. Hence, stating that though she need not reply to the show cause notice, however, as abundant caution, she has filed an explanation as a ritual. According to her, Section 679-B of the said Act violates Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and is in the teeth of the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act i.e., Part IX-A of the Constitution read with 12th Schedule of the Constitution of India. Since the basis for such action on mere formation of opinion by the Government it vests totally an arbitrary exercise of power to remove an elected peoples' representative, such course is quite opposite to the tenets of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the object and intent of the 74th Constitutional Amendment.

Further, as per Article 243U of the Constitution the term of 5 years is assured to an elected Mayor of the municipality, which is an independent local institution. Therefore conferring of such sweeping power in respect of institution under Article 243 (P) of the Constitution of India unlike corporation is totally unconstitutional. Therefore, the said provision defeats the object and scope. An elected representative is virtually kept under mercy of the government in spite of such constitutional safeguard enshrined. Even otherwise, prescribing a disqualification for fu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document