1. This petition is yet another case brought to this Court questioning recognition by a Mayor of a Municipal Corporation of a Municipal Councilor as “a Leader of Opposition”. The petitioner also seeks writ of mandamus against the Mayor to recognise the petitioner, in place of the contesting respondent as a leader of opposition.

2. The facts of the case are very few and can be set out as under-

The 1st respondent herein is the Municipal Corporation of the City of Pune, (hereinafter referred to as “the Corporation” for the sake of brevity) incorporated under the provisions of Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”, for the sake of brevity). The 2nd respondent is the Commissioner of the said Corporation. 5th respondent is the Divisional Commissioner of Pune Revenue Division, Pune and the 6th respondent is the State.

3. The general elections for electing counselors, of the said Corporation was conducted on 14th February, 2007. The petitioner, 3rd & 4th respondents were elected as the counselors at this election. The total strength of counselors of the said Corporation is 144. The respective strength of counselors of various political parties is admittedly as under -

i) 41 National Congress Party (NCP)

ii) 36 Indian National Congress (INC)

iii) 25 Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)

iv) 20 Shiv Sena (SS)

v) 08 Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS)

vi) 14 Independents (Ind.)

144 Total.

The petitioner was elected as counselor from the INC. The 3rd respondent was elected from NCP and the 4th respondent was elected from BJP.

4. Admittedly, after the aforesaid elections the NCP along with 5 independent counselors registered Aghadi/Front with the 5th respondent the Divisional Commissioner under Section 31A of the said Act. Thus, total strength of this Aghadi of NCP works out to 46. Similarly, one more Aghadi/front was registered by the INC by including 8 independent counselors, thus, making total of this Aghadi/front of INC as 44.

5. In terms of section 19 of the said Act, at the first meeting after the aforesaid General Elections, the 3rd respondent was elected as the Mayor. One Mr. Mokate (who is not a party to the present petition) belonging to SS, was elected as Dy. Mayor. Both of them secured 67 votes.

6. On 16th March 2007 the President of INC by way of written communication sought recognition of the petitioner as a leader of opposition. In this communication it is stated that Aghadi/front has been formed by INC along with 8 independent with total strength of 44 counselors. It is stated that BJP and SS had not formed alliance, in as much as the elections of the said Corporation are concerned. It is submitted that NCP counselor has been elected as a mayor and therefore, INC with 8 independent counselors who have formed the aforesaid Aghadi constitute 'the party in opposition having greatest numerical strength' and therefore, they are entitled to have their leader, the petitioner, to be recognised as a leader of opposition.

6. On the same day a communication was submitted to the 3rd respondent jointly by leaders of SS and BJP staking their claim for appointment of 4th respondent as leader of opposition. It is claimed therein that BJP, SS have been working as an alliance in the State of Maharashtra for the last 27 years and that they had contested 2007 election of the said Corporation jointly. It is claimed that on account of their combined strength, which is total 45, they constitute 'the party in opposition having greatest numerical strength' and therefore, they are entitled to have their leader, the 4th Respondent, to be recognised as a leader of opposition.

7. The 3rd respondent Mayor however issued a letter dated 17th March, 2007 to the 4th respondent as leader of BJP recognising him as the leader of opposition. It is pertinent to note that, this communication is issued on the sole and only basis that BJP and SS have formed an alliance and that their combined strength is 45. It is this decis