The provisions of section 7-A1 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, were not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the principles of natural justice were not applicable to the case.

Headnote:
BOMBAY PROVINCIAL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT - SECTION 7-A1 - VALIDITY - ELECTION - POSTPONEMENT - MALA FIDES - NATURAL JUSTICE - PRINCIPLES - APPLICABILITY - ADMINISTRATOR - APPOINTMENT - CIRCUMSTANCES - ELECTION PROGRAMME - APPROVAL - WITHDRAWAL - POWER - SCOPE - ELECTORAL ROLLS - REVISION - DIRECTIONS - ISSUANCE.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Councillor of the Municipal Corporation of Kolhapur, challenged the order issued by the State Government under section 7-A1 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, directing that all Councillors of the Corporation shall cease to hold office and appointing an Administrator to manage the affairs of the Corporation. The petitioner contended that the action taken by the Government was mala fide, that the Government had not given an opportunity of being heard to the Municipal Corporation before issuing the order, and that the impugned order was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the provisions of section 7-A1 of the Act were not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and that the principles of natural justice were not applicable to the case. The Court also held that the Government was not bound to give an opportunity of being heard to the Municipal Corporation before issuing the order under section 7-A1. However, the Court found that the order issued by the Government was mala fide and that the Government had deliberately misled the Court by stating that the electoral rolls were not ready. The Court directed the respondents to hold elections to the Municipal Corporation, Kolhapur for the reconstitution of the Municipal Corporation as early as possible or in any case before 31st of October, 1984.
Issues: 1. Whether the provisions of section 7-A1 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, were violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the principles of natural justice were applicable to the case? 3. Whether the Government was bound to give an opportunity of being heard to the Municipal Corporation before issuing the order under section 7-A1? 4. Whether the order issued by the Government was mala fide?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The provisions of section 7-A1 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, were not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 2. The principles of natural justice were not applicable to the case. 3. The Government was not bound to give an opportunity of being heard to the Municipal Corporation before issuing the order under section 7-A1. 4. The order issued by the Government was mala fide.
Final Decision: The Court made rule partly absolute and directed the respondents to hold election to the Municipal Corporation, Kolhapur for the reconstitution of the Municipal Corporation as early as possible or in any case before 31st of October, 1984. The respondents were also directed to take immediate steps under section 7-A read with relevant rules for preparation of electoral rolls and drawing election programme, by specifying relevant dates.

JUDGMENT - C.S. DHARMADHIKARI, J.:---The petitioner Shri Chougule was the Councillor of the Municipal Corporation of Kolhapur. He was duly elected in the general elections held in May, 1978. His tenure as Municipal Councillor commenced from 16th of August, 1978 when the first meeting of the Council was held. Five years tenure of the Councillors, expired on 15th of August, 1983. By a notification dated 16th of July, 1983 issued under section 6 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the said term was extended upto 31 of March, 1984. Prior to the expiry of the extended term the Municipal Corporation passed a resolution on 18th of December, 1982 for taking steps towards holding of the general elections. On 22nd of August, 1983 a tentative election programme was also drawn by the Municipal Commissioner. By this programme the 20th of February, 1984 was fixed as the date for filing the nominations under Rule 8 of the Rules. This date was duly approved by the Government vide Government Resolution dated 18th of November, 1983. First of October 1983 was specified as the date with reference to which the electoral rolls were to be prepared. On 5th of December, 1983 draft wardwise rolls were published. For preparation of these rolls staff was appointed by the Municipal Corporation and requisite expenditure was also incurred. It appears that thereafter by a letter dated 24th of January, 1984 the Collector of Kolhapur wrote to the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra in Urban Development Department that since the applications for inclusion of names were received to the tune of 75000 and about 15000 applications for corrections, transfer and deletion ware also received, it was not possible for them to complete and finalise the electoral rolls prior to the date fixed. In view of this the Collector proposed that the date of final publication of wardwise rolls be relaxed by a week and suitable Government orders be issued in that respect. By a letter dated 25th of January, 1984, the Deputy Secretary to the Government informed the Collector that the Municipal Commissioner is the proper authority to fix the date for final publication of wardwise list of voters, and, therefore, he should approach the Municipal Commissioner for fixing suitable date for publication of the final wardwise list after taking into consideration the difficulties pointed out by him. The Municipal Commissioner then wrote to the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra on 26th of January, 1984 that the election programme will have to be changed since a change in the date of publication of the final wardwise roll is necessary. He also proposed changes in the election programme. According to this changed programme final ward roll was to be published on 2nd February, 1984. By a letter dated 27th of January, 1984 written to the Municipal Commissioner by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra this change in the election programme was duly noted. However, surprisingly enough he was also informed that the Government Resolution dated 18th of November, 1983 fixing 20th February, 1984 as a date for filing the nominations, should be kept in abeyance until further orders. Thereafter on 20th March, 1984 the petitioner wrote a letter to the Municipal Commissioner enquiring as to why the elections are not being held. The Municipal Commissioner by his letter dated 23rd of March, 1984 informed the petitioner that the Government of Maharashtra has informed him to stay the election process until further orders and, therefore, he is unable to hold the elections. He also informed that to complete the election process after the publication of final voters list, he will take minimum 70 days. Therefore, in substance the whole election process was held up since the earlier approval granted by the State Government was kept in abeyance. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present petition on 27th of March, 1984 prayin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document