Anoop V. Mohta, J.

Oral Judgment:

Heard finally by consent and in pursuance to an Order dated 15.12.2008 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.29235/2008, between the parties.

2. The petitioner being a member/Councillor of Yeola Municipal Council, has challenged the impugned Order passed by Respondent no.1 dated 10.10.2008 in Appeal under Section 55-(A) & (B) of the Maharashtra (Municipal Councils), (Nagar Panchayats) and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 ( for short, "the Act"). The operative part of the Order reads as under:

"1. As it is becoming clear that Shri Ramdas Darade, President, Yewle Municipal Council, District Nasik carried out unauthorized construction without permission before he got elected and same was not removed at his own even after he got himself elected as the President and that it has been removed by the Municipal Council, I have come to the conclusion that said act of the Shri Darade is not matching to the post of the President, I am removing Shri Darade from the post of the President as per provisions of Section 55(A) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Municipalities & Industrial Township Act 1965 from the date of this order.

2. As per provisions of Section 55(B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Municipalities and Industrial Township Act, 1965, Shri Ramdas Darwde, President, Yewle Municipal Council, District Nasik is being considered to be not eligible/disqualified to contest the election for the period of 6 years from the date of this order."

3. Based upon the due lease agreement & permissions granted by the Council some time in the year 1981 itself and later on extended in the year 1983, the petitioner had erected initially temporary structure and later on constructed the premises which he was using as hotel based upon various requisite licence and permissions. Admittedly, on 16.12.2007 the said premises/structure was demolished.

4. The petitioner got elected as a Councillor of Yeola Municipal Council (for short, "the Council") in the year 2006. He was elected/appointed as a President of the Council. He was working as President till the date of impugned order since 2006.

5. Respondent no.2 had filed PIL No.46 of 2007 in the High Court, Bombay thereby, prayed for demolition of all the above alleged unauthorised constructions made on the land bearing C.T.S. No.3807 of the Council. It was also prayed that the petitioner be disqualified from being President of the Council.

6. By an Order dated 12.03.2008 this Court has disposed of the said PIL in which the present petitioner was also respondent no.3. The relevant extract of the Order is as under:

"1. Grievance of the petitioner was two fold in the petition. One that certain construction had been made unauthorisedly and it should be demolished. This relief was granted by this Court and we are told at the bar that the constructions made unauthorisedly have already been demolished and removed. The second contention was that one of the construction was made by the Respondent No.3 who is the President of the Respondent No.1 Council. Therefore, he has incurred disqualification to be the President and therefore he should be removed as a President. This is an admitted fact that the respondent No.3 President had made constructions unauthorisedly and those constructions have already been demolished and removed. It is not disputed. The only dispute is whether respondent No.3 could be removed because admittedly the constructions he had made unauthorisedly were made by him before he was elected as a President.

2. We feel that this matter can be considered by the Government in terms of Section 55A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965.Without going into the rival contentions of the parties, we dispose of this petition directing the Government to consider import of the fact that the Respondent No.3, the President of the Respondent No.1 Council had constructed a b