Bombay High Court Quashes Disqualification of Municipal Councillors Under Section 42 of Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act — Minister's Order Set Aside for Violation of Natural Justice and Lack of Speaking Order

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 101
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, four councillors of the Municipal Council, Narkhed, challenged an order dated 29.11.2016 passed by the Minister of Urban Development, Government of Maharashtra, disqualifying them under Section 42 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, for a period of five years. The petitioners contended that the order was passed without affording them any opportunity of hearing and without assigning any reasons, thus violating principles of natural justice. The court noted that the order was a cryptic one-line order stating that the councillors were disqualified for five years, with no mention of any hearing or reasons. The court held that the order was not a speaking order and was passed in gross violation of natural justice. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the impugned order and allowed the petition. The court also directed that the petitioners be permitted to participate in the ongoing election process for the Municipal Council, subject to their eligibility under the Act.

Headnote

A) Municipal Law - Disqualification of Councillors - Section 42 of Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - Natural Justice - The Minister passed an order disqualifying four councillors for five years without giving them an opportunity of hearing and without recording any reasons. The court held that such an order violates principles of natural justice and is not a speaking order, hence liable to be set aside. (Paras 4-6)

B) Administrative Law - Speaking Order - Requirement of Reasons - The court emphasized that an order disqualifying a person must be a reasoned order, disclosing the grounds on which it is based. The absence of reasons renders the order arbitrary and unsustainable. (Para 5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the order of disqualification passed by the Minister under Section 42 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, without affording an opportunity of hearing and without assigning reasons, is sustainable in law.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 29.11.2016 passed by the Minister, Urban Development Department, disqualifying the petitioners under Section 42 of the Act. The petition was allowed. The court directed that the petitioners be permitted to participate in the election process for the Municipal Council, Narkhed, subject to their eligibility under the Act.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • Speaking order
  • Disqualification of councillors
  • Section 42 Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act 1965
  • Opportunity of hearing
  • Reasoned decision
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (12) 103

Writ Petition No. 6817 of 2016

2016-12-15

R. K. Deshpande

Shri Anand Jaiswal, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Nikhil Padhye for Petitioners; Smt. Bharti H. Dangre, Government Pleader assisted by Shri A.R. Chutake for Respondents

Smt. Hemlatabai Deorao Tekade, Smt. Nirmala Rahul Gajbhiye, Shri Praveen Laxmanrao Balpande, Shri Ashfq Mohammad Shafiq Qureshi

The State of Maharashtra, The Minister Urban Development, The Collector Nagpur

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging disqualification order passed by Minister under Section 42 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of the disqualification order and permission to participate in the ongoing election process.

Filing Reason

The Minister passed an order disqualifying the petitioners for five years without giving them an opportunity of hearing and without assigning any reasons.

Issues

Whether the impugned order of disqualification passed under Section 42 of the Act is sustainable when it is not a speaking order and passed without affording opportunity of hearing.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the order was passed without any notice or hearing and without any reasons, violating principles of natural justice. Respondents did not contest the petition; the Government Pleader submitted that the order was passed by the Minister and the court may pass appropriate orders.

Ratio Decidendi

An order of disqualification under Section 42 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 must be a speaking order and must be passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the affected councillors. Failure to do so renders the order arbitrary and violative of natural justice, liable to be set aside.

Judgment Excerpts

The order impugned is a cryptic order. It does not disclose any reasons. It does not indicate that any opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners before passing the order of disqualification. The order impugned is not a speaking order and it is passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.

Procedural History

The Minister passed the disqualification order on 29.11.2016. The petitioners filed the writ petition on 06.12.2016, and the court passed an interim order. The petition was finally heard on 15.12.2016 and allowed.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965: 42
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Remands Certificate Grant Matter to High Court for Fresh Consideration in Service Posting Dispute. Certificate Under Article 133(1) of Constitution Held Not Properly Granted as High Court Failed to Consider Articles 132(1) and 133(1)(b)...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeals in Land Revenue Case — Conversion of Agricultural Land for Non-Agricultural Use Requires Prior Permission Under Section 95 of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The court held that deemed conversion under Se...