The nomination for election as Chairman under Rule (6) of the Second Schedule to the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, read with section 10 of the Assam General Clauses Act, 1915, could be delivered in the office of the SDO (C) Rangia on 23.8.97 before the Agenda for election as Chairman was taken up by the first meeting of the Board, since 22.8.97, the day preceding the date fixed for the first meeting, was a holiday.

In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the election of Chairperson and Vice-Chairman of Rangia Municipal Board held on 23.8.97 in the office of the Rangia Municipal Board.

2. Petitioner Nos 1 to 5 are all Commissioners of the Rangia Municipal Board elected from Ward Nos 3, 5, 4, 2 and 7 respectively in June, 1997. The Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Rangia sent a notice dated 2nd August, 1997 to all the Commissioners of the Rangia Municipal Board including the petitioners that the first meeting of the Rangia Municipal Board would be held on 23rd August, 1997 at 10.30 AM and in the said notice the Agenda for the meeting comprised of (i) oath taking, (ii) selection/election of Chairperson; and (iii) selection election of Vice Chairman. Along with the said notice, a copy of the Second Schedule to the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, which detailed the business and procedure at the first meeting of the Municipal Board, was sent to the Commissioners. Thereafter, by a notice dated 22.8.97, the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Rangia, nominated Sri Kunjadhar Deka, petitioner No.2, to preside over the said meeting. In accordance with the said notice, the first meeting of the Rangia Municipal Board was held on 23.8.97 in the office of the Rangia Municipal Board and the petitioner No.2 presided over the meeting. When the Agenda for election of Chairperson and Vice Chairman was taken up, the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Rangia, (for short SDO (C), Rangia) informed the President of the meeting that he had received only two nomination papers from respondents 4 and 5 for the posts of Chairperson and Vice Chairman of the Rangia Municipal Board. The case of the petitioners in the writ petition is that beside, the nomination papers of respondents 4 and 5 Mrs Leni Deka and Md Safiur Rahman were also proposed for Chairperson and Vice Chairman respectively by the petitioners in the nomination papers submitted to SDO (C) Rangia. The further case of the petitioners is that the said nomination papers of Mrs Leni Deka as Chairperson and Md Safiur Rahman as Vice Chairman were sought to be submitted by the petitioners before the SDO (C), Rangia, at his residence on 22.8.97, ie on the day preceding the date of the first meeting of the Rangia Municipal Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) but since 22.8.97 was a public holiday, the SDO (C) Rangia, refused to accept the said nomination papers and in the circumstances, the petitioners submitted the said nomination papers before the SDO (C), Rangia on 23.8.97 in the morning hours; but the same were not considered by the SDO (C), Rangia on the ground that as per Rule (6) of the Second Schedule to the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, (for short the Act, 1956), nomination should have been filed before noon of the day preceding the date fixed for the first meeting; in other words, it should have been filed on 22.8.97. The further case of the petitioners is that at the said first meeting of the Board on 23.8.97, a dispute arose regarding the nomination papers filed by the petitioners and petitioner No.2, who was presiding over the meeting, adjourned the meeting on the demand made by other petitioners and thereafter, all the petitioners left the , place of meeting. The SDO (C), Rangia, then nominated Sri Bibekananda Adhikari, respondent 6, as the President of the meeting and at the said meeting Mrs Rekha Rani Das, respondent 4 was elected as Chairperson and Sri Pankaj Lahkar, respondent 5, was elected as Vice Chairman of the Board.

3. Aggrieved, the petitioner moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for appropriate final as well as interim relief. On 1.9.97, this Court while issuing notice to the respondents directed that the case would be listed on 4.9.97 for admission and till 4.9.97 the elec'tion of respondents 4 and 5 would remain suspended. The matter, however, could not be taken up on 4.9.97 and was finally heard on 21.5.98.

4.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document