High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Mohammad Rafiq, C. J., Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
RAKESH SUSHIL SHARMA - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF M. P. & ORS. - RESPONDENTS
W. P. No. 14695 of 2020
Decided On : 10-02-2021
Delimitation - Municipal Corporation Bhopal - M. P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, Rule 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation (Extent of Wards) Rules, 1994
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenges the action of the State Election Commission in issuing public notice for reservation of 85 Wards of Municipal Corporation Bhopal, citing reduction in population due to the 'Smart City Project'. The Collector dismissed the petitioner's representation based on frozen administrative boundaries and use of 2011 census figures for ward formation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no infirmity in the Collector's order, stating that the use of 2011 census figures as the basis for ward formation was justified and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: Challenging the action of the State Election Commission in issuing public notice for reservation of 85 Wards of Municipal Corporation Bhopal, based on reduction in population due to the 'Smart City Project'.
Ratio Decidendi: The use of 2011 census figures as the basis for ward formation was justified, and the court found no reason to interfere with the Collector's order.
Final Decision: The present writ petition stands dismissed.
ORDER MOHAMMAD RAFIQ, C. J. : – The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Rakesh Sushil Sharma with the following prayer : –
(1) This Hon’ble Court may kindly call for the entire record pertaining to order dated 15-9-2020 passed by the respondent No. 3 and order dated 29-6-2020 passed by the respondent No. 1.
(2) This Hon’ble Court may kindly please to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 29-6-2020 issued by the respondent No. 1 and order 15-9-2020 issued by the respondent No. 3.
(3) This Hon’ble Court may kindly please to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent for conducting fresh exercise for delimitation of wards of Municipal Corporation Bhopal and also conduct survey for identifying the population of SC, ST and OBC before reservation of the wards of Municipal Corporation, Bhopal.
(4) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in view of aforesaid facts and grounds may kindly be allowed in favour of petitioner.”
2. The petitioner is a resident of Ward No. 32 in the city of Bhopal. He has filed the present writ petition challenging the action of the respondent No. 2/State Election Commission in issuing public notice for reservation of 85 Wards of Municipal Corporation Bhopal for upcoming election of the Municipal Corporation Bhopal. The petitioner earlier also filed a writ petition bearing W. P. No. 12541/2020 raising similar issue.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the Collector, Bhopal on 25-8-2020 pointing out that on account of the implementation of the ‘Smart City Project’, several voters of Ward No. 25, 31 and 32 have been relocated to other wards of the city and therefore, the population of those wards have been reduced. A fresh exercise of delimitation of the wards should therefore be carried out as per section 10(3) of the M. P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1956’) read with Rule 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation (Extent of Wards) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules, 1994’). The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by order of this Court dated 14-9-2020 directing the respondent No. 2- Collector/District Returning Officer, Bhopal, District Bhopal (M. P.) to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of communication of the order passed today. The Collector, has by order dated 15-9-2020 has mechanically dismissed the representation filed by the petitioner. It is this order which is assailed in the present writ petition.
4. Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Collector in dismissing the representation of the petitioner has given two reasons both of which are wholly irrelevant for deciding the controversy. The first reason which the Collector has given is that since the Urban Development and Housing Department of the Government of M. P. has issued an order dated 7-8-2020 directing that in view of the ongoing Census Operation of 2021, the limits of the Administrative Units have to be kept frozen as per the mandate of Rule 8(iv) of the Census Rules, 1990 issued by the Central Government for the specified period. Since, the boundaries of the Administrative Units cannot be altered between 1-1-2020 to 31-3-2021, the exercise of delimitation cannot be undertaken. The second reason given by the respondent/Collector in rejecting the representation is also factually incorrect that as per section 10(3) of the Act of 1956, the formation of wards shall be made in such a way that the population of each of the wards shall, so far as practicable, be the same throughout the city and the area included in the ward is compact. The ‘Population’ as per Rule 2(4) of Rules, 1994 shall mean the population ascertained at the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have be
The use of census figures as the basis for ward formation and the discretion of the competent authority to allow a variation of up to 15% in population between wards.
The court affirmed that without new census data or changes in municipal boundaries, the delimitation of wards is unauthorized as per the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009.
Delimitation process requires equal population but lacks court intervention unless mala fides are demonstrated.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of judicial review in administrative actions, emphasizing the prevention of arbitrariness, irrationality, unreasonableness, bias,....
Delimitation exercises must adhere strictly to statutory provisions to ensure free and fair elections; failing to do so constitutes a colorable exercise of power.
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.