Civil Writ Petition No. 22496 of 2011. Case: Harmesh Rana Vs State of Punjab and Others. High Court of Punjab (India)
| Case Number | Civil Writ Petition No. 22496 of 2011 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mr. H.S. Sethi, Advocate and For Respondents: Mr. Yatinder Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for the State, Mr. Jaspreet Singh, Advocate and Mr. J.S. Yadav, Advocate |
| Judges | Ranjit Singh, J. |
| Issue | Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 - Sections 21, 21(3); Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 - Sections 16(2), 18, 27(1)(b); Punjab Municipal Act, 1999 - Sections 10, 12, 12(3)(i), 12(3)(ii), 22, 42, 42(9), 61(2) |
| Judgement Date | July 16, 2012 |
| Court | High Court of Punjab (India) |
Judgment:
Ranjit Singh, J.
-
How many would constitute two-third majority if the Municipal Council consists of 14 members in all, one of which is dead is the short and crisp question arising for consideration in this case. Incidental issue would also be to see what will be the position when exact two-third comes more than the whole number by fraction in which case whether it has to be rounded off to lower or higher whole number. Both the questions as marshaled above are apparently covered by earlier precedents but still the issue had unnecessarily been debated by the counsel appearing for the respondents, who were movers of this ''No Confidence Motion'.
-
The issue has been raised by the petitioner, who is President of Municipal Council, Kuraril and has faced a no confidence motion, which, as per the stand of the respondents is stated to have been carried by two-third majority of the members constituting the Municipal Council.
-
Eight members (respondent Nos.5 to 13) moved a resolution for no confidence against the petitioner, who was the President of the Council under Section 22 of the Punjab Municipal Act (for short "the Act"). As per this section, President or Vice President may be removed from the office by the State Government on the ground of abuse of his power or of habitual failure to perform his duty or pursuance of a resolution requesting his removal passed by two-third of the members of the committee. As averred in the petition, there are 13 elected members of Municipal Council, Kurali, besides the Member Legislative Assembly (MLA) being the ex-officio member of this Council. Thus, as per the petitioner, Municipal Council, Kurali comprised of 14 members. According to him, two-third majority of 14 members would come to 9.33 (numerically) and, thus, 10 members would be the requirement to pass a ''no confidence motion' to constitute two-third of the members constituting this Council. The impugned resolution, in fact, has been passed by 9 members, 8 of which are elected and 9th one is the MLA. 9 members have passed this resolution unanimously but according to the petitioner, this will not constitute two-third majority as required under Section 22 of the Act. The petitioner thereafter was not being allowed to work as a President on this ground. It was also made out that the petitioner would be under suspension in terms of Section 22 of the Act, which indeed is so provided by way of proviso contained in the Section, which is as under:
Provided that if a resolution requesting the removal of the President of the Vice-President is passed by two third of the members of the committee, the President or, as the case may be the Vice-President shall be deemed to be under suspension immediately after such resolution is passed.
-
Petitioner would term that this resolution having not been passed by two-third members of the total number of members is no resolution in the eyes of law and, thus, the action of the official respondents in not permitting the petitioner to work as President to be totally arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner accordingly has approached this court to challenge this resolution through the present petition.
-
Election to the Municipal Council, Kurali were held in May 2008. The petitioner was elected as Municipal Council from Ward No. 4. As per Section 12(3)(i) of the Act, Municipal Council, Kurali consisted of 13 members, which were directly elected. In terms of Section 12(3)(ii) of the Act, local MLA is to be taken as ex-officio member and, thus, the Municipal Council consisted of 14 members. On 26.7.2008, petitioner was duly elected as President of the Municipal Council and since then he has been working as such. The tenure of the President under the Act is five years. In February, 2011, one member named, Jagir Singh elected from Ward No. 8, died. No by-election in this ward has been held so far. On 1.11.2011, 8 members of the Council gave a requisition for calling a meeting for consideration of no confidence motion against the petitioner.
-
Once such requisition is received, then the meeting is to be fixed within next 14 days and is to be held within a period of 30 days. The meeting was accordingly fixed on 28.11.2011. As per the petitioner, 8 members did not have the requisite strength to carry no confidence motion against the petitioner. Ten members came present in this meeting on 28.11.2011. MLA also came present. Three...
To continue reading
Request your trial