Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rohan Vishwanath Khedekar, was elected as a councillor of Ward No. 7 of Devgad Jamsande Nagarpanchayat in 2020. Respondent No. 2, Yogesh Prakash Chandoskar, filed a disqualification application under Section 16(1)(h) and (i) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, alleging that the petitioner had an interest in a contract with the municipality. The petitioner had applied for building permission for a land that was originally jointly purchased with his brother but later partitioned, and the permission was granted. The Collector, Respondent No. 3, by order dated 31st March 2023, rejected the petitioner's application for cross-examination of the complainant and witnesses. Subsequently, by order dated 11th April 2023, the Collector allowed the disqualification application and disqualified the petitioner as a councillor. The petitioner challenged both orders by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The High Court held that the Collector's refusal to grant cross-examination violated the principles of natural justice. The court noted that the petitioner had specifically sought to cross-examine the complainant and witnesses to test the veracity of their allegations. The Collector's reasoning that cross-examination would delay the proceedings was not justified. The court set aside both the order rejecting the cross-examination application and the disqualification order, and remanded the matter back to the Collector for fresh consideration after granting the petitioner an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. The court directed the Collector to decide the disqualification application afresh within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Natural Justice - Right to Cross-Examination - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The petitioner, a municipal councillor, was disqualified by the Collector without being allowed to cross-examine the complainant and witnesses in disqualification proceedings. The High Court held that denial of cross-examination vitiates the proceedings as it violates the principles of natural justice. (Paras 1-13) B) Municipal Law - Disqualification of Councillor - Sections 16(1)(h), 16(1)(i), 44, 55 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - The Collector disqualified the petitioner for having interest in a contract with the municipality. The court found that the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself, including the right to cross-examine, and thus the disqualification order was unsustainable. (Paras 2-13) C) Civil Procedure - Cross-Examination - Right to Cross-Examine Witnesses - The court held that in quasi-judicial proceedings, the right to cross-examine adverse witnesses is an essential component of natural justice. The Collector's rejection of the petitioner's application for cross-examination was arbitrary and illegal. (Paras 5-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Collector's order disqualifying the petitioner as a municipal councillor without granting an opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and witnesses violates principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Collector's order dated 31st March 2023 rejecting cross-examination and the order dated 11th April 2023 disqualifying the petitioner, and remanded the matter back to the Collector for fresh consideration after granting the petitioner an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. The Collector was directed to decide the disqualification application afresh within four weeks.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Right to Cross-Examination
- Disqualification of Councillor
- Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act
- 1965
- Section 16(1)(h)
- Section 16(1)(i)
- Section 44
- Section 55
- Article 226
