SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(Bom) 171

Bombay High Court
DHARMADHIKARI,GINWALA
Municipal Council, Malkapur - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Decided On : 09/10/1976

Advocates:
Spl. Civil Appln. No.610 of 1972:-C.G. Madkholkar, for Petitioner; V.P. Salve, Asstt. Govt. Pleader, for Respondents.Spl. Civil Appln. No.1691 of 1973:- C.G. Madkholkar, for Petitioner; V.P. Salve, Asstt. Govt. Pleader, for Respondents Nos.1 to 3.

Headnote:

The Court held that the order of supersession of the Municipal Council and appointment of the Administrator was illegal and quashed the same. The Court observed that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was issued in a colourable exercise of power.

Fact of the Case:

The Municipal Council, Malkapur was superseded by the State Government under S.313 of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and an Administrator was appointed. The petitioners, who were the elected Councillors of the Municipal Council, challenged the order of supersession by filing a writ petition.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the order of supersession was illegal and quashed the same. The Court observed that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was issued in a colourable exercise of power.

Issues: Whether the order of supersession of the Municipal Council and appointment of the Administrator was legal.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the order of supersession was illegal and quashed the same. The Court observed that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was issued in a colourable exercise of power. The Court further observed that the State Government had not given a reasonable opportunity to the Municipal Council to explain the charges against it and that the order was based on vague and non-existent grounds.

Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order of supersession of the Municipal Council and appointment of the Administrator.

Judgement

DHARMADHIKARI, J. :- General elections for electing the Councillors to the Municipal Council, Malkapur were held in June 1967. Thereafter, the first meeting of the Municipal Council for electing the President was held in July 1967 and it appears that one Shri J.N. Jadhao, who is respondent No.4 before us, was elected as the President of the Municipal Council. The term of the elected Councillors in the normal course would have expired in July 1972. But it appears that it was extended from time to time. Initially as there was an acute scarcity m the majority of the districts of Maharashtra in the year 1972, the State Government decided to extend the term of the Municipal Council upto 31st of December 1972. Then came the Maharashtra Municipal Council (Postponement of Elections due to Scarcity Conditions in the State) Act, 1972. By virtue of this enactment the elections were postponed. It appears from the record that in the meantime on 22nd May 1972 Shri Vallabhdas Jagannath Purohit was elected as the President of the Municipal Council. It is the case of the petitioners that after this election of Shri Purohit as a President, the opposite group in the Municipal Council started making false complaints against him and the Municipal Council as a result of which initially a notice under S.42 of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued to Shri Purohit who was then the President of the Municipal Council, asking him to show cause as to why he should not be removed from the Municipal Council itself. An explanation to this show-cause notice was given by him. He had also raised an objection that an action proposed to be taken under S.42 was wholly uncalled for. Thereafter, according to the petitioners, the Director of Municipal Administration ordered an inquiry against the President Shri Purohit under S.311 of the Act. Shri Purohit and the Municipal Council challenged the said order before this Court by filing a writ petition being Special Civil Appln. No.610 of 1972 and it appears from the record that the said writ petition was duly admitted by this Court and an interim stay of further enquiry was also granted. From the record of the Special Civil Application No.610 of 1972 it also appears that the State Government then filed an application for vacation of stay. After hearing the parties this Court modified the stay order in the following term on 15th of January 1973:

"The interim stay granted on 4-5-19-72 is modified in that the enquiry will proceed and the enquiry report will also be submitted but further action on the report be stayed."

2. In spite of this order it appears that instead of proceeding further with the enquiry the State Government cancelled the whole proceeding by order dated 22nd of March 1973 and instead passed an order issuing a show-cause notice dated 19-4-1973. By this order the Municipal Council was directed to show cause within 20 days from the date of its receipt as to why action under S.313 of the Act should not be taken by the Government. The grounds on which the said action was proposed to be taken read as under:

"It has been reported to Government that Malkapur Municipal Council in Buldana District,

(1) is not competent to perform duties imposed upon it by or under the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965, or any other law for the time being in force, as mentioned in Annexure I.

(2) persistently makes default in the performance of such duties or in complying with the lawful directions and orders issued by the authorities empowered under the law to issue such directions or orders to the Council as mentioned in Annexure II.

(3) has exceeded and abused the powers as mentioned in Annexure III and that

(4) the financial position and the credit of the Municipal Council is seriously threatened as mentioned in Annexure IV."

To this show-cause notice in all four schedules were attached, giving various instances. We will refer to these schedules and instances enumerated
































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top