IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, J.
Smt. Asha Suryavanshi, W/o Narayan Suryavanshi - Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development and Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 472 of 2018
Decided On : 13-04-2018
Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 - Section 18 - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Receipt of information - Political democracy - Seeks to challenge order – Jurisdiction - Petitioner was elected as President of Municipal Council directly from among the voters of Municipal Constituency on under provisions of the Act of 1961 - Councillors of the said Municipal Council moved a proposal for no confidence motion against petitioner which she challenged by way of W.P.(C) before this Court by filing writ petition which was disposed of as on behalf of State it was submitted that the notice has already been withdrawn and there is no proceeding of no confidence motion pending against the petitioner -Held, Subsequently moved application on behalf of respondents on part of the Collector is contrary to law - Accordingly Collector is directed to consider the said application in the light of discussion made herein-above by making further/additional satisfaction to find out whether the consent of respondents was obtained by inducing pressure/duress or misrepresentation and thereafter to send further recommendation on the proposal of recall to the State Government - Such further satisfaction should be recorded by the Collector within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in presence of parties – Thereafter State Government/State Election Commission would proceed strictly in accordance with law depending on the receipt of further recommendation of the Collector - Writ petition is allowed
1. R.M. Sahai, J, speaking for the Supreme Court in the matter of Mohan Lal Tripathi v. District Magistrate, Rae Bareilly and others AIR 1993 SC 2042 defined recall of elected representative as under: -
“... Recall of elected representative is advancement of political democracy ensuring true, fair, honest and just representation of the electorate. Therefore, a provision in a statute for recall of an elected representative has to be tested not on general or vague notions but on practical possibility and electoral feasibility of entrusting the power of recall to a body which is representative in character and is capable of projecting views of the electorate. ...”
2. The petitioner herein, who is elected President of Municipal Council, Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling in question the memo dated 23-12-2017 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Collector, Bilaspur and the memo dated 22-1-2018 (Annexure P-2) issued by the State of Chhattisgarh forwarding the memo dated 23- 12-2017 to the Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Election Commission, and also eventually seeks to challenge the order dated 31-1-2018 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Chhattisgarh State Election Commission, by which the programme for preparation of voter list has been published by the State Election Commission.
3. The aforesaid challenge has been made by the petitioner herein on the following factual backdrop: -
4. Municipal Council, Ratanpur is a body corporate constituted under Section 18 of the Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act of 1961') and consists of 15 Councillors. The petitioner was elected as President of Municipal Council, Ratanpur directly from among the voters of Ratanpur Municipal Constituency on 4-1-2015 under the provisions of the Act of 1961. The Councillors (with requisite number) of the said Municipal Council moved a proposal for no confidence motion against the petitioner herein on 17-7-2017 which she challenged by way of W.P.(C)No.2319/2017 before this Court by filing writ petition which was disposed of on 28-8-2017, as on behalf of the State it was submitted that the notice dated 17-8-2017 has already been withdrawn and there is no proceeding of no confidence motion pending against the petitioner. Thereafter, on 31-8-2017, a proposal for recall of President was moved by respondents No.5 to 17 herein before the Collector under Section 47 of the Act of 1961. On 26-9-2017, the Collector called information from the Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Ratanpur, as to whether the petitioner herein has completed two years of her tenure from the date of assuming the office and other information as required under Section 47(1) of the Act of 1961. Again, on 1-11-2017, on receipt of information from the Chief Municipal Officer, the Collector fixed the date of appearance of the said Councillors of the Municipal Council moving the process of recall, on 6-11-2017 and on the said date, the Councillors appeared and their signatures were verified and same have been taken in the note sheet dated 6-11-2017, and the Collector has directed the matter to be placed for further consideration on 23-12-2017. In the meanwhile, on 30-10-2017, all the 13 Councillors repeated their prayer for taking action for recall of the petitioner herein. On 23-12- 2017, the Collector after verification and satisfaction sent the matter to the State Government with his recommendation as required under Section 47 of the Act of 1961 and the State Government, in turn, sent the matter to the State Election Commission vide Annexure P-2 and on 31-1-2018, on receipt of the said information, the State Election Commission has issued the programme for voter list. According to the petitioner, on 1-2-2018, a news regarding recall of President and voting on the proposal for recall was published in the daily newspaper and thereafter, on 5-2-2018, out of 13 Councillors, respondents No.14 t
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India
Bhaurao Dagdu Paralkar v. State of Maharashtra and others
Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Jamal Uddin Ahmad v. Abu Saleh Najmuddin
Lazarus Estate Ltd. v. Beasley
Mohan Lal Tripathi v. District Magistrate, Rae Bareilly and others
Naravadi Bai Choudhary and others v. State of M.P. and others
Province of Bombay v. Khusaldas Advani
Prabhakar Narayan Kelkar and others v. State of M.P. and others
Ram Chandra Singh v. Savitri Devi and others
State of M.P. and another v. Mahendra Kumar Saraf and others
State of Maharashtra and others etc. v. Saeed Sohail Sheikh etc.
Shri K.R. Raghavan, Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi V and others v. Union of India and others
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rajendra Singh and others
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.