Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Prabhodhan Sanstha, a public charitable trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 and the Societies Registration Act, 1960, was allotted land bearing Survey No.812 in Siddham Shettiwar Layout, Ward No.10, Mul, by the Municipal Council, Mul (respondent No.3) through a resolution of its standing committee dated 22nd June, 1998, for construction of a 'Yuva Bhavan' (youth centre). The petitioner took possession and constructed a structure on the land. Nearly 15 years later, respondent No.4 filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL No.19 of 2013) challenging the allotment. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court disposed of the PIL on 7th August, 2013, recording the statement of the Municipal Council that a report would be submitted to the Collector. Subsequently, the Collector of Chandrapur passed an order under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, suspending the resolution of the Municipal Council. The petitioner challenged this order before the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur, who confirmed the Collector's order in revision. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The main legal issue was whether the Collector's order and the Commissioner's confirmation were sustainable, particularly as the petitioner was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing before the order was passed. The petitioner argued that the orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice. The respondents contended that the Collector had power under Section 308 to suspend the resolution and that the petitioner had no right to be heard. The court analyzed the provisions of Section 308 and held that the power to suspend a resolution must be exercised after affording a hearing to the affected party, especially when the resolution had been acted upon and the petitioner had been in possession for 15 years. The court noted that the Collector did not give any notice to the petitioner before passing the order, and the Commissioner also did not consider the petitioner's objections. The court quashed and set aside both the Collector's order and the Commissioner's order, and directed the Collector to decide the matter afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the Municipal Council.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - The Collector passed an order suspending a resolution of the Municipal Council allotting land to the petitioner without giving any notice or opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, who was in possession and had constructed a structure on the land. The Divisional Commissioner confirmed the order in revision without considering the petitioner's objections. Held that the order of the Collector and the confirmation by the Commissioner are unsustainable for violation of principles of natural justice. (Paras 5-8)
B) Municipal Law - Suspension of Resolution - Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - The Collector's power under Section 308 to suspend a resolution of a Municipal Council must be exercised after affording a hearing to the affected party, especially when the resolution had been acted upon and the allottee had been in possession for 15 years. The Commissioner in revision also failed to consider the petitioner's objections. Held that the orders are quashed and set aside. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of the Collector under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 suspending a resolution of the Municipal Council and the confirmation thereof by the Divisional Commissioner in revision are sustainable in law, particularly when the petitioner was not heard before passing the order.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the order of the Collector dated 7th August, 2013 and the order of the Divisional Commissioner dated 30th September, 2016. The court directed the Collector to decide the matter afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the Municipal Council.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to be heard
- Section 308 Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act
- 1965
- suspension of resolution
- revision by Commissioner
- procedural fairness
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (09) 153
Writ Petition No. 6809 of 2016
Shri Anil S Kilor for Petitioner; Shri V. P. Maldhure, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2; Shri Ganesh N. Khanzode for Intervenor
The Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur; The Collector, Chandrapur; Municipal Council, Mul; Arvind S/o Divakar Bokare
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Collector under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 suspending a resolution of the Municipal Council allotting land to the petitioner, and the confirmation of that order by the Divisional Commissioner in revision.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought quashing of the Collector's order dated 7th August, 2013 and the Commissioner's order dated 30th September, 2016, and restoration of the resolution of the Municipal Council.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing before the Collector passed the order suspending the resolution, and the Commissioner confirmed the order without considering the petitioner's objections.
Previous Decisions
The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in PIL No.19 of 2013 disposed of the PIL on 7th August, 2013, recording the statement of the Municipal Council that a report would be submitted to the Collector. Thereafter, the Collector passed the suspension order, and the Commissioner confirmed it in revision.
Issues
Whether the order of the Collector under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 suspending the resolution of the Municipal Council is sustainable when the petitioner was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing?
Whether the confirmation of the Collector's order by the Divisional Commissioner in revision is sustainable when the petitioner's objections were not considered?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the Collector's order was passed without any notice or opportunity of hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice. The Commissioner also did not consider the petitioner's objections.
The respondents argued that the Collector had power under Section 308 to suspend the resolution and that the petitioner had no right to be heard.
Ratio Decidendi
The power under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 to suspend a resolution of a Municipal Council must be exercised in accordance with principles of natural justice. An order affecting the rights of a party who has been in possession of land for 15 years and has constructed a structure cannot be passed without giving that party an opportunity of hearing. The revisional authority must also consider the objections of the affected party.
Judgment Excerpts
The subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition is an order passed by the Collector of Chandrapur under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 ('Act'), ordering suspension of a resolution passed by 3rd respondent Municipal Council, Mul and confirmation of that order in revision by the Divisional Commissioner.
It is not in dispute that in pursuance of this resolution, the petitioner has been in possession of the subject land and has even constructed a structure on this land.
The Collector, however, did not give any notice to the petitioner before passing the order of suspension. The Commissioner also did not consider the objections of the petitioner.
The order of the Collector and the confirmation thereof by the Commissioner are unsustainable for violation of principles of natural justice.
Procedural History
The petitioner, a public trust, was allotted land by the Municipal Council, Mul by resolution dated 22nd June, 1998. The petitioner took possession and constructed a structure. In 2013, respondent No.4 filed PIL No.19 of 2013 challenging the allotment. The Division Bench disposed of the PIL on 7th August, 2013, recording the statement of the Municipal Council that a report would be submitted to the Collector. Thereafter, the Collector passed an order under Section 308 of the Act suspending the resolution. The petitioner filed a revision before the Divisional Commissioner, who confirmed the Collector's order on 30th September, 2016. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965: Section 308
- Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950:
- Societies Registration Act, 1960:
