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

1997 Supreme(Guj) 365

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :C.K.THAKKER, S.D.Pandit
KASAMBHAI FATEHBHAI GANCHI - Appellant
Versus
CHANDUBHAI DAHYABHAI rajput - Respondent
C.A. 6379 of 1997
Decided On : 08/04/1997

Advocates Appeared: B.R.Gajjar, G.M.JOSHI, R.S.SANJANWALA

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India, 1950 - Arts. 226 and 243-ZG - Judicial Review - Bar on jurisdiction of High Court - Held, judicial review is part of basic structure and High Court can entertain petition under Art. 226 seeking challenge to election of Municipality.

       Article 226 forms basic structure of the Constitution and power of judicial rewiew cannot be taken away even by a Constitutional amendment, now it cannot be contended that a High Court has no jurisdiction under Art. 226 in election matters. At the most, a High Court as well as Election Tribunal has jurisdiction but when a High Court has jurisdiction and the Court has exercised it, the order cannot be said to be `without jurisdiction.

       [Para 15]

       (b) Constitution of India, 1950 - Arts. 226, 243-T, 243-ZG and 243-ZA (Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992) - Gujarat Municipality Reservation of SC/ST, BC and Women for the Office of the President) Rules, 1994 - Rule 2 - Reservation of President for BC in `J Municipality - Respondent No. 6 though a BC candidate got elected from general category and thereafter contested for President which was reserved for BC catagory - Held, in view of Supreme Court ruling in Sarswati Devi vs. Shanti Devi, 1997 SCC 122 respondent could not contest from reserved category - Interim relief vacated.

       In the instant case, in our opinion, the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Saraswati Devi squarely applies. Here also, the appellant belongs to backward class but he did not contest the election as a candidate of the backward class. So far as President is concerned, the seat is reserved for backward class candidate and hence, as per the ratio laid down in Saraswati Devi, he could not have contested the election.

       [Para 13]

C. K. THAKKER, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Mr. G. M. Joshi, learned Advocate for applicant and Mr. R. S. Sanjanwala for Opponent No. 1.

( 2 ) THIS Civil Application is filed by the applicant (Appellant of Letters Patent appeal No. 731 of 1997) for the following reliefs in terms of para 3, which reads thus :"3. Appellant, therefore, prays that - (A) This Honble Court may be pleased to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned order dated 9-7-1997 passed by the learned single Judge in special Civil Application No. 10451 of 1996. (B) This Honble Court be pleased to grant ad-interim order in terms of para 3a above. (C) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. "

( 3 ) WE have admitted the appeal. We are, however, of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking into account the law laid down by the honble Supreme Court in Saraswati Devi v. Shanti Devi, 1997 (1) SCC 122, interim relief prayed by the applicant cannot be granted. We are, therefore, recording reasons for refusing interim relief and as to why, in our opinion, the Letters Patent Appeal required admission.

( 4 ) THE applicant is original Respondent No. 6 in Special Civil Application No. 10451 of 1996. That petition was filed by Chandubhai Dahyabhai Rajput, Opponent no. 1 therein. It was his case that in accordance with the provisions of the Gujarat municipalities Act, 1963 (hereafter referred to as "the Act") election of Jambusar municipality was held on December 20, 1994. It was asserted by the petitioner that he contested the election as a member of Jambusar Nagarpalika from Ward No. 7 which was reserved for backward class. He contested the election as a backward class candidate and was declared elected as such.

( 5 ) BY the Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992, Part IXA was inserted making provisions for "municipalities". Art. 243t provides for reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in every Municipality. Clause (4) of Art. 243t makes provision for reservation of Chairpersons in such manner as may be provided by the State Legislature. Pursuant to the Constitutional amendments and in the exercise of the powers under the Gujarat Municipalities Act, the Gujarat municipalities (Reservation of S. C. , S. T. , B. C. and Women for the Office of the president) Rules, 1994 were framed by the State Government. Rule 2 provided reservation of the office of the President in favour of S. C. , S. T. , B. C. and women in accordance with the roster shown in the Schedule. It is not disputed by and between the parties that so far as Jambusar is concerned, for the year 1995-96, the office of the President was reserved for a Woman, for 1996-97, it was general whereas for the current year, i. e. , 1997-98, it is reserved for Backward Class.

( 6 ) IT is an admitted fact that respondent No. 6 (Applicant herein) also belongs to Backward Class. He also contested the election of the Municipality and got himself elected as a member of the Municipality. It is, however, not disputed that he contested the election and got elected as a member in general category and not as a member belonging to S. C. , S. T. or B. C. The petitioner as well as respondent no. 6 wanted to contest for the office of President of the Municipality. According to respondent No. 6, he was eligible and qualified for the office of President of the Municipality as he belonged to Backward Class whereas according to the petitioner, respondent No. 6 was ineligible and unqualified as he contested the election and got himself elected as a member of the Municipality not from reserved quota but on general seat and hence he could not contest election for the office of President of Municipality.

( 7 ) IN view of rival claims of the parties, this petition came to be filed by the petitioner restraining the authorities from accepting the nomination form of respondent No. 6 for the office of President. It a


















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top