Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the cancellation of nominations of women members in the Shahjahanpur Municipal Board by the State Government. In January 1989, Smt. Sarla Devi was nominated as the sole woman member. Following amendments to the United Provinces Municipalities Act, 1916, the State Government issued a notification on 19.2.1990 cancelling existing nominations and later nominated Smt. Abida and Smt. Hazra Khatoon. A no-confidence motion against the Board's President, Mohd. Iqbal, was initiated, leading to further nominations of Smt. Shyama Devi and Smt. Baijanti Devi. Iqbal challenged the constitutional validity of the fourth proviso to Section 9 of the Act and the subsequent notifications in the High Court, which ruled in favor of Iqbal, declaring the State's actions invalid. The appellants, including the new women members and the former Vice-President, appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the right to be nominated is contingent on the State's pleasure, and the legislature's provision allowing removal of nominated members at its discretion does not violate constitutional rights. The court also upheld the validity of the no-confidence motion passed against Iqbal, confirming the election of Om Narain as the new President. The court concluded that the provisions of the Act were constitutional and did not infringe upon the principles of natural justice or equality. The appeals were allowed, affirming the State's authority to manage nominations and removals of members in municipal governance.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Equality Before Law - Application of Article 14 - Cancellation of nominations of women members without notice does not violate Article 14 - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 14 - The court held that the nominated members do not have the same rights as elected members and their removal at the pleasure of the State Government is constitutionally valid. (Paras 51D-51E) B) Municipal Law - Nominated Members - Doctrine of Pleasure - Nominated members hold office during the pleasure of the State Government - United Provinces Municipalities Act, 1916, Section 9 - The court affirmed that the legislature's provision allowing removal of nominated members at the State's pleasure does not violate principles of natural justice or democratic norms. (Paras 51B-51C) C) Municipal Law - No-Confidence Motion - Validity of No-Confidence Motion - United Provinces Municipalities Act, 1916, Section 87-A - The court upheld the no-confidence motion passed by a majority of the Board members, confirming the election of a new President following the motion. (Paras 53C-D)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the cancellation of nominations of women members by the State Government without notice violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, affirming the constitutionality of the fourth proviso to Section 9 of the United Provinces Municipalities Act, 1916, and upheld the validity of the no-confidence motion against Mohd. Iqbal, confirming the election of Om Narain as President.
Law Points
- Constitutional validity
- Doctrine of pleasure
- Nominated members
- Article 14
- Article 15
- Municipal Board elections
- Natural justice
