Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Fazalur Rehman Gulam Nabi, President of Municipal Council, Balapur, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Collector, Akola, dated 3rd & 4th May 2012, which dismissed his application under sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987. The application sought dismissal of a disqualification petition filed by respondent No.1, Smt. Raziya Begam Sayyed Natiquiddin Khatib, under Rule 6 of the said Rules for disqualification of the petitioner as a Municipal Councillor under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Act, 1986. The petitioner contended that the disqualification petition did not comply with Rule 6 as it lacked proper verification. The Collector, however, found that the petition contained statements of material facts running into more than 20 pages, that the respondent No.1 had verified the documents attached to the petition, and that the petition was verified and signed by the respondent No.1. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the Collector was justified in refusing to dismiss the petition for non-compliance of Rule 6. The court noted that the verification of documents attached to the petition was sufficient compliance with Rule 6. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the Collector was directed to proceed with the disqualification petition in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Local Authority Members' Disqualification - Rule 6 Compliance - Verification of Petition - The Collector held that the petition contained statements of material facts running into more than 20 pages, that the respondent No.1 had verified the documents attached to the petition, and that the petition was verified and signed by the respondent No.1. The High Court upheld this finding, stating that the Collector was justified in refusing to dismiss the petition for non-compliance of Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petition filed under Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987 was liable to be dismissed for non-compliance of the said Rule.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The Collector is directed to proceed with the disqualification petition in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Rule 6 of Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules
- 1987 requires a petition to contain a statement of material facts and be verified by the petitioner
- verification of documents attached to the petition is sufficient compliance
- the Collector has discretion to decide on compliance.
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (05) 56
Writ Petition No.1110 of 2012
Shri P.C. Madkholkar for Petitioner, Shri S.V. Sohoni for Respondent No.1, Shri B.N. Mohta for Respondent No.2, Smt. B.H. Dangre, Additional Government Pleader with Shri K.L. Dharmadhikari, AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4
Fazalur Rehman Gulam Nabi
Smt. Raziya Begam Sayyed Natiquiddin Khatib, Municipal Council Balapur, Election Officer/Returning Officer, Collector Akola
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Collector dismissing the petitioner's application for dismissal of a disqualification petition for non-compliance of Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to quash the Collector's order and to dismiss the disqualification petition filed by respondent No.1.
Filing Reason
The petitioner claimed that the disqualification petition did not comply with Rule 6 of the said Rules as it lacked proper verification.
Previous Decisions
The Collector dismissed the petitioner's application under Rule 7(2) of the said Rules, holding that the petition contained statements of material facts and was properly verified.
Issues
Whether the disqualification petition filed under Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987 was liable to be dismissed for non-compliance of the said Rule.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the disqualification petition did not comply with Rule 6 as it was not properly verified.
The respondent No.1 contended that the petition contained statements of material facts and was verified, thus complying with Rule 6.
Ratio Decidendi
The verification of documents attached to the petition is sufficient compliance with Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987. The Collector was justified in refusing to dismiss the petition for non-compliance of Rule 6.
Judgment Excerpts
The Collector has recorded the finding in his order that the petition contains the statements of material facts running into more than 20 pages.
The finding is also recorded that the respondent No.1 has also verified the documents attached to the petition, that the petition is verified and signed by the respondent No.1.
Procedural History
Respondent No.1 filed a disqualification petition before the Collector under Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987. The petitioner filed an application under Rule 7(2) for dismissal of the petition for non-compliance of Rule 6. The Collector dismissed the application. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition challenging the Collector's order.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Act, 1986: Section 3(1)(a)
- Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987: Rule 6, Rule 7(2)
