Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Manoj Kumar Gupta, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, JJ.
Shakuntla Devi – Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
WRIT - C No. - 14031 of 2022
Decided On : 12-10-2022
U.P. Town Areas Act, 1914 - Section 3 - U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 - Section 3, (2), 333, 11-B (2), 10-A, 30, 11-A, B, 13-G, H, 30 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 243-Q, Q(1), (2), U, (1), S, P(e), (d), B, E, R, S, (5) - Representation of People Act, 1950 - Section 3-A, 3-B (8), 10-A and 151-A - Constitution (Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 - Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - Section 341 - General Election - Initiating Process for Holding Fresh Election - Whether term of newly constituted Municipality is governed by clause (1) of Article 243-U or clause (4) of Article 243-U - Whether High Court, in exercise of power under Article 226, can grant any relief to petitioner - Whether writ petition is premature, based on mere apprehension, and is liable to be dismissed in limine – Para 45.
Finding of the Court :
Fundamentally, Court find that all steps, which are required to be taken under law, had been followed while holding election in question - In ultimate analysis, Court find no qualitative difference in election that had been held except use of terminology ‘bye- election’ in election notification - Otherwise, election satisfied all requirements of law - Once Court find that election held was after making all statutory compliances as were required under law for holding a general election, Court have no hesitation in declaring that duration of Municipality elected would be five years from date of its first meeting in terms of Article 243-U read with Section 10-A of Act of U.P. Municipalities Act - Present Municipality is entitled to run its full duration of five years from date of its first meeting - Stand of State respondents that its term would expire and therefore, exercise for holding general election of Municipality is being taken to constitute a new Municipality in its place, cannot be countenanced, being in teeth of constitutional mandate - It would not have been possible for Court to give above relief, had election been conducted without exercise of delimitation, preparation of electoral roll and application of reservation roaster - In consequence, Court allow writ petition and quash impugned notification/communication in so far as it relates to Nagar Palika Parishad, enlisted at serial no.22 in list annexed with notification and restrain respondents from holding fresh elections of Nagar Palika Parishad, until it completes its full duration of five years from date of its first meeting unless dissolved earlier in accordance with law.
Result : Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.
1. The petitioner is elected Chairperson of Nagar Palika Parishad, Siswan Bazar, District Maharajganj. She has challenged the notification dated 26.04.2022 issued by respondent no.1, the State Government, addressed to District Magistrates of 67 districts, directing them to initiate exercise for delimitation of wards in 151 Municipalities, which have been newly constituted or have undergone extension of municipal limits since the last general election. The list of such Municipalities is annexed alongwith the impugned notification. Nagar Palika Parishad, Siswan Bazar is at serial no.22. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from initiating process for holding fresh election of Nagar Palika Parishad, Siswan Bazar, Maharajganj expected to be held by the end of the year – 2022 and from interfering in the functioning of the petitioner as Chairperson of Nagar Palika Parishad, Siswan Bazar until the expiry of the term of Nagar Palika on 31.03.2027 unless dissolved earlier.
2. The above reliefs have been claimed in the backdrop of following facts :
2(1). Siswan Bazar, District Maharajganj was initially notified as a Nagar Panchayat under Section 3 of the U.P. Town Areas Act, 1914 vide notification dated 3.02.1953. It comprised of 14 wards and the total population of the Nagar Panchayat as per census of India 2011 was 20963. The last election of Nagar Panchayat, Siswan Bazar was held on 12.12.2017, whereby the Chairperson and 14 Ward members were elected, followed by constitution of the Nagar Panchayat.
2(2). Later on, the State Government decided to create a new Municipal Council (Nagar Palika Parishad) in Siswan Bazar, Maharajganj by adding 22 revenue villages/ 17 Gram Panchayats in the existing Nagar Panchayat area and accordingly, issued a draft notification dated 10.12.2019. It was followed by a final notification dated 31.12.2019 issued under clause (2) of Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India read with Section 3 (2) of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916, thereby including the area mentioned in Schedule I of the notification in the transitional area of Nagar Panchayat Siswan Bazar. Additionally, the transitional area of Nagar Panchayat Siswan Bazar, Maharajganj mentioned in Schedule II of the notification was notified as a smaller urban area (Municipal Council) to be known as Municipal Council Siswan Bazar, District Maharajganj.
2(3). It led to filing of P.I.L. No.1822 of 2020 (Anoop Kumar Pathak and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) for direction (i) to the State respondents to dissolve the erstwhile Nagar Panchayat Siswan Bazar, Maharajganj; (ii) to constitute the Municipal Council and Ward Committees and (iii) to appoint administrator in Municipal Council, Siswan Bazar, District Maharajganj. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 8.02.2021 with direction to the District Magistrate, Maharajganj to hold election of newly created Municipal Council, Siswan Bazar, as early as possible, however not later than three months from the date of communication of the order. The operative part of the order is as follows:-
In view whereof the District Magistrate, Maharajganj is directed to hold election of newly created Municipal Council, Siswan Bazar, as early as possible, however not later than three months from the date of communication of this order.”
2(4). In pursuance of the above direction, the State Government vide its communication dated
Point of Law : Clause (4) of Article 243-U prescribes that a municipality constituted upon the dissolution of a municipality before expiration of its duration, shall continue only for remainder of th....
The constitutional scheme and the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 and the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 were harmoniously interpreted to conclude that the Gram Panchayat had c....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of legal provisions related to the term of the Municipal Corporation, the constitution of the Delimitation Board, and the scope ....
Non-conduct of municipal elections for over seven years constitutes a violation of constitutional duties and governance principles, warranting a writ of mandamus to uphold democratic processes.
The duration of local authorities' jurisdiction over newly constituted municipal areas and the dissolution of municipalities as per the provisions of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 and the Constitutio....
Respondent-State Government is required to hold elections to the Nelamangala CMC and reconstitute Council in terms of Section 358 of Act. Since it has been noticed by this Court that the process of d....
The court ruled that the Ordinance dissolving elected municipal bodies without legislative consent violates constitutional provisions, affirming the principle that municipalities must continue until ....
Judicial intervention in electoral matters post-notification is barred under Article 243ZG of the Constitution to uphold electoral integrity.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
