Bombay High Court Quashes Appointment of Subject Committees and Chairman in Municipal Council Due to Non-Compliance with Section 81 of Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act. Proportional Representation Required for Election of Subject Committee Members.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 80
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Vitthal P. Chopade, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 18.12.2010 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ichalkaranji (Respondent No.2), which constituted Subject Committees and appointed their Chairmen for the Ichalkaranji Municipal Council (Respondent No.3). The Municipal Council is governed by the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965. Elections to the Council were held in 2006, and it had 57 councillors. By an order dated 17.9.2009, five councillors were disqualified under the Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986 and Rules. These councillors challenged the disqualification in writ petitions, and the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, by order dated 5.1.2010, allowed them to remain councillors but restricted their participation: they could attend and sign the register but could not participate in proceedings, vote, or draw remuneration. On 9.6.2010, the Sub-Divisional Officer issued a notice for a meeting to constitute Subject Committees and appoint Chairmen. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was illegal because the election of members to Subject Committees must be by proportional representation as per Section 81 of the Act, and the Chairman must be elected by the members of the Subject Committee. The respondents argued that the order was valid. The court analyzed Section 81 and held that the election of members to Subject Committees must be by proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote, and the Chairman must be elected by the members of the Subject Committee. The court found that the Sub-Divisional Officer did not follow this procedure and also failed to consider the effect of the disqualification of five councillors on the quorum. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned order dated 18.12.2010 and directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to proceed afresh in accordance with law.

Headnote

A) Municipal Law - Subject Committees - Appointment of Chairman - Section 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - The court considered the validity of the appointment of Subject Committees and their Chairmen by the Sub-Divisional Officer. The court held that the appointment was not in accordance with Section 81 as the election of members to Subject Committees must be by proportional representation and the Chairman must be elected by the members of the Subject Committee. The impugned order was quashed. (Paras 1-10)

B) Municipal Law - Disqualification of Councillors - Effect on Quorum - The court noted that five councillors were disqualified and their participation was restricted by court order. The court held that the Sub-Divisional Officer failed to consider the effect of these disqualifications on the quorum for the meeting. (Paras 3-5)

C) Municipal Law - Proportional Representation - Section 81 of the Act - The court interpreted Section 81 to require that the election of members to Subject Committees be conducted by proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote. The court found that the Sub-Divisional Officer did not follow this procedure. (Paras 6-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appointment of Subject Committees and their Chairmen by the Sub-Divisional Officer was valid under Section 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, and whether the impugned order was passed in compliance with the statutory requirements.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order dated 18.12.2010, and directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to proceed afresh in accordance with law, specifically following the procedure under Section 81 of the Act.

Law Points

  • Interpretation of Section 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils
  • Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act
  • 1965
  • Requirement of election by proportional representation
  • Validity of appointment of Chairman of Subject Committees
  • Effect of disqualification of councillors on quorum
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2011:BHC-AS:1654-DB

Writ Petition No.37 of 2011

2011-01-21

V.C. Daga, R.G. Ketkar

2011:BHC-AS:1654-DB

Mr. A.V. Anturkar with Mr. Prashant Kulkarni for Petitioner; Mr. Vijay Patil, Government Pleader for Respondent No.1; Mr. Aniket U. Nikam for Respondent Nos.2 and 3; Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni with Mr. S.S. Shah for Respondent Nos.4,5,7 to 27; Mr. Amit Borkar for Respondent Nos.28 to 51

Vitthal P. Chopade

The Collector, Kolhapur & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer constituting Subject Committees and appointing Chairmen.

Remedy Sought

Quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 18.12.2010 and the constitution of Subject Committees and appointment of Chairman.

Filing Reason

The petitioner alleged that the appointment of Subject Committees and Chairmen was not in accordance with Section 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965.

Previous Decisions

Five councillors were disqualified on 17.9.2009; they filed writ petitions and the Division Bench on 5.1.2010 allowed them to remain councillors but restricted their participation.

Issues

Whether the appointment of Subject Committees and their Chairmen by the Sub-Divisional Officer was valid under Section 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965? Whether the impugned order was passed in compliance with the statutory requirements, including the requirement of proportional representation for election of members to Subject Committees?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the election of members to Subject Committees must be by proportional representation as per Section 81, and the Chairman must be elected by the members of the Subject Committee. Respondents argued that the impugned order was valid and in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi

The election of members to Subject Committees under Section 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 must be by proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote, and the Chairman must be elected by the members of the Subject Committee. The Sub-Divisional Officer failed to follow this procedure and also did not consider the effect of disqualification of councillors on quorum.

Judgment Excerpts

By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 18.12.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent, Sub-Divisional Officer, as also has challenged the constitution of the Subject Committees and the appointment of the Chairman of the respective Committees dated 18.12.2010. The court held that the election of members to Subject Committees must be by proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote, and the Chairman must be elected by the members of the Subject Committee.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.37 of 2011 in the Bombay High Court challenging the order dated 18.12.2010 of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The court issued rule and heard the matter finally by consent of parties.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965: Section 81
  • Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986:
  • Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Rules, 1987:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Seeking Disqualification of Panchayat Member for Alleged Pecuniary Interest in Repair Permission Resolution. Court holds that mere participation in a resolution granting permission for repairs to a house owned by ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Appointment of Subject Committees and Chairman in Municipal Council Due to Non-Compliance with Section 81 of Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act. Proportional Representation Required for Election of Subject Committee Members.