Back
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
D. P. S. CHAUHAN, DEEPAK MISRA
PRABHARANI VISHWAKARMA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH - Respondents
L. P. A. 220 Of 1997
Decided On : 02/23/1999
MUNICIPALITIES ACT - RESIGNATION OF PRESIDENT - NOTICE - MUNICIPALITY - CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS - LEGAL PRINCIPLES.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, the President of the Municipal Council, tendered her resignation to the Chief Municipal Officer. The Collector, acting on the representation of the appellant, issued an order declaring that there was no valid resignation and restoring the appellant to her office. The State Government, however, passed an order directing the appellant to assume charge, holding that the resignation was valid. The appellant challenged the State Government's order in the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the resignation tendered to the Chief Municipal Officer did not meet the requirement of law as mandated under Section 43(7) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961, which required the President to resign by notice in writing to the Municipality. The Court held that the Municipality, being a body corporate, had a distinct legal entity and that the notice of resignation had to be addressed to the Municipality, not to the Chief Municipal Officer.
Issues: 1. Whether a notice of resignation addressed by the President of a Municipal Council to the Chief Municipal Officer meets the requirement of law as provided under Section 43(7) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961? 2. Whether the subsequent conduct of the appellant, including her participation in a meeting of the Council and her request to the Collector to hold a fresh election, amounted to an acceptance of the fact of resignation, estopping her from challenging the validity of the resignation.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the requirement of law under Section 43(7) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961, is that the President may resign his office at any time by notice in writing to the Municipality. The Court interpreted the provision strictly, holding that the notice of resignation had to be addressed to the Municipality, not to the Chief Municipal Officer. The Court distinguished the case of Om Prakash Choudhary v. Collector, Guna, 1987 MPLJ 369, where the Court had held that a resignation addressed to the Chief Municipal Officer could be regarded as a notice to the Municipality, on the ground that the provision interpreted in that case related to a different realm. 2. The Court held that the appellant's subsequent conduct, including her participation in a meeting of the Council and her request to the Collector to hold a fresh election, amounted to an acceptance of the fact of resignation. The Court held that the appellant could not be permitted to turn around and take shelter on a technical plea, having accepted the resignation in unequivocal terms and having spoken eloquently about it.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant had accepted the fact of resignation in entirety and that her subsequent conduct estopped her from challenging the validity of the resignation. However, the Court made the cost imposed by the learned single Judge easy and made no order as to costs in the appeal.
( 1 ) PREGNABILITY of the decision dated 14-8-97 passed in Writ Petition No. 1378/97 by a learned Single Judge of this Court is called in question by the appellant invoking the jurisdiction under clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
( 2 ) THE respondent No. 5 and respondent No. 6, the Vice-President and a Councillor of Deori Municipality respectively approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking writ of mandamus directing the competent authority to hold election in accordance with sub-section (4) of the Section 43 of the M. P. Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereainafter referred to as 'the Act'), as a vacancy had occurred in the office of the President in the Municipal Council due to the resignation of the President, the respondent No. 4 therein. The fact situation as have been uncurtained in the writ petition are that an election of the councillors was held in the year 1994 for the Municipal Council, Deori (in short 'the Council') and subsequently in January, 1995 the appellant herein was elected to the Office of the President which was reserved for woman candidate belonging to other backward class. The respondent No. 5 was the Vice-President of the Council and the respondent No. 6 was a woman member belonging to backward class. It was set forth in the petition that the respondent No. 4 therein resigned from her office by tendering her resignation on 23-12-96 to the Chief Municipal Officer who on receipt of the resignation informed the Collector by his memo No. 301/ra/96 indicating that a vacancy had occurred due to the resignation of President. On 24-12-96 he asked the respondent No. 4 therein to handover charge to the Vice-President. The elected President handed over charge of her office to the Vice-President on 26-12-96. The original resignation was forwarded by the Chief Municipal Officer to the Collector, Sagar with a covering letter dated 26-12-96, as the Collector desired that original letter of resignation should be placed before him. A meeting of the council was held on 26-12-96 to discuss the agenda "naveen Bus Stank Ki Dukano Ki Nilami Ki Karyavahi Ke Sambandh Me Vichararth". In the said meeting 14 Councillors including the present appellant were present. The meeting was presided over by the Vice-President. Some of the Councillors including the appellant herein suggested that the meeting of the Council should be convened only after the election of the new President. The minutes were duly signed by the appellant. By memo dated 28-12-96 the Chief Municipal Officer again requested the competent authority for initiation of steps for holding of the election. The appellant also agitated her grievance for non-holding of the election of the new President. The Collector issued order dated 17-3-97 appointing the Sub-Divisional Officer as Presiding Officer for holding the election of the President. In the meantime, as putforth by the writ petitioners, the respondents Nos. 5 and 6 herein, that the election was delayed and at that juncture an amendment in the Act came into existence whereby the tenure of the President was extended from 21/2 years to 5 years. Because of the changed situation the respondent No. 4 therein on 27-2-97 made a representation to the State Government alleging, inter alia, that she had not tendered her resignation from the office and the letter of resignation was written under coercion. The State Government invited comments of the Chief Municipal Officer and, eventuality, by order dated 9-4-97 the State Government arrived at the conclusion that there was no valid resignation in law and no vacancy had been caused in the office of the President. Accordingly a direction was issued for restoration of the charge of the office to the appellant. The order passed by the State Government to this effect was the subject matter of the challenge in the writ petition. As the fact situation exposits it was contended before the learned single Judge that resignation tendered to the Chief Muni
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
