Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Nomination of Councillors Without Consultation with Party Leader. Section 63(2B) of Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 mandates consultation with leader of party before nomination.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Prosecution
  • 154
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Rajaram Appa Patil and Mangesh Sudhakar Tambe, filed a writ petition challenging the nomination of two councillors to the Municipal Council, Parola by the President (Respondent No.3) without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party. The petitioners were elected as councillors of the Shivsena party in the general elections held on 28.11.2016. Petitioner No.1 was the leader of the Municipal party/Aaghadi. Five councillors were elected of the Shivsena party, which was registered in the Municipal Council under Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965. The President nominated two councillors without consulting the leader of the party. The petitioners contended that the nomination was illegal and contrary to Section 63(2B). The respondents argued that the President had the power to nominate and that consultation was not mandatory. The court analyzed Section 63(2B) and held that the provision mandates consultation with the leader of the party before nomination. The court found that the President failed to consult the leader of the Shivsena party, rendering the nominations illegal. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the nominations, and directed the President to make fresh nominations after consulting the leader of the party. The court also disposed of the civil application.

Headnote

A) Municipal Law - Nomination of Councillors - Section 63(2B) of Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 - Consultation with Leader of Party - The President of the Municipal Council nominated two councillors without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party, which had five elected councillors and was a registered party. The court held that the nomination was illegal as the President failed to consult the leader of the party as required under Section 63(2B). The nominations were quashed and set aside. (Paras 1-6)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the nomination of two councillors to the Municipal Council, Parola by the President without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party is valid under Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is allowed. The nominations of the two councillors made by the President without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party are quashed and set aside. The President is directed to make fresh nominations after consulting the leader of the party. Rule made absolute. Civil application disposed of.

Law Points

  • Consultation with leader of party is mandatory before nomination of councillors under Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils
  • Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act
  • 1965
  • Nomination without consultation is illegal and liable to be set aside
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (04) 17

Writ Petition No.246 of 2017 with Civil Application No.15377 of 2017

2018-04-27

S.V. Gangapurwala, A.M. Dhavale

M.S. Deshmukh for petitioners, A.V. Deshmukh for State, B.R. Warma for Respondent No.3, S.P. Shah for Respondent No.4

Rajaram Appa Patil and Mangesh Sudhakar Tambe

The State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, District Collector, President, Municipal Council, Parola, and Bapu Tukaram Mahajan

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging nomination of councillors to Municipal Council without consultation with leader of party.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of nomination of two councillors and direction to nominate after consulting leader of Shivsena party.

Filing Reason

President of Municipal Council nominated two councillors without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party, violating Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965.

Issues

Whether the nomination of two councillors by the President without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party is valid under Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the President failed to consult the leader of the Shivsena party before nominating councillors, which is mandatory under Section 63(2B). Respondents contended that the President has the power to nominate and consultation is not mandatory.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 mandates consultation with the leader of the party before nomination of councillors. Failure to consult renders the nomination illegal.

Judgment Excerpts

The President of the Municipal Council nominated two councillors without consulting the leader of the Shivsena party. Section 63(2B) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 mandates consultation with the leader of the party before nomination. The nominations are quashed and set aside.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.246 of 2017 challenging the nomination. The court heard the matter and reserved judgment on 18.04.2018, pronouncing it on 27.04.2018.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965: 63(2B)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Municipal Corporation's Appeal Against Refund of Property Tax Arrears to Subsequent Purchaser. Liability for Property Tax Arrears Prior to Acquisition of Ownership Cannot Be Foisted on New Owner Under Sections 139 and 140 of G...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Official Liquidator's Appeal in Property Tax Dispute — Municipal Corporation Cannot Claim Taxes After Winding Up Order Without Prior Adjudication. Held that property tax and water tax claims against company in liquidation are n...