Petitioner challenged an Ordinance amending the Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act and sought a stay. The court found the petition infructuous as elections had already been conducted and dismissed it without adjudicating the merits.
Writ petition stands dismissed; Rule discharged; No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4514 of 2001
Prakash s/o Kamlakar Pathak,
Age 51 years, Occ. Business and
Journalist as well as Member of the
Municipal Council, Latur,
r/o Samrat Chowk, Koyna Sub Station Road,
Latur 413 512.
...PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra.
2. The Collector & District Election Officer, Latur.
3. The State Election Commissioner, Maharashtra State, Mumbai.
4. The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Latur.
...RESPONDENTS
...
None for the petitioner.
Mr. K.S.Patil, AGP, for respondent State.
Mr.Vikram Patil, Adv., h/f Mr. V.D.Hon,
Adv., for respondent no.4.
...
CORAM:S.B.DESHMUKH AND K.U.CHANDIWAL, JJ.
DATE:26/8/2010
***
2
PER COURT : (Per S.B.Deshmukh, J.)
1.None appears for the petitioner. We
have heard learned A.G.P. Mr.K.S.Patil and
learned Counsel Mr.Vikram Patil, instructed by
Mr. V.D.Hon, learned Counsel, who appears for
respondent no.4.
2.Respondent no.4 is Municipal Council,
constituted in accordance with the provisions of
Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats
and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 ( hereinafter
referred as the "Act of 1965"). The petitioner
in the writ petition appears to have claimed
status of Municipal Councillor and journalist on
the date of filing of the writ petition. In this
writ petition the petitioner has raised challenge
to the Ordinance issued by respondent State,
amending Section 9 of the Act of 1965. This is
peculiar prayer made by the petitioner. By
consequential prayer, stay to the execution of
the Ordinance No.XXVIII of 2001 thereby amending
Section 10 of the Act of 1965 is sought.
Petition appears to have been filed on
24.10.2001.
3.In response to the notice, affidavit-in-
reply is filed on behalf of respondent no.2. It
has been affirmed by one Sanjay s/o Dattatraya
Ambekar, who was working as Town Planner,
3
Collectorate, Latur, on the date of affirmation.
Copy of the Ordinance ( Annexure D - page No.33)
is on record. With the assistance of learned
A.G.P. and Advocate for respondent no.4 we have
seen the statements made in this affidavit. From
paragraph no.7 of the reply affidavit of
respondent no.2, it seems that delimitation
(formation of wards) was widely notified in daily
newspapers. According to affiant, election
programme was also published by the Collector in
accordance with law. There was no objection
raised on behalf of the petitioner. Learned
Counsel appearing for the Municipal Council,
respondent no.4, makes a statement that not only
delimitation has been completed but election for
that period also has taken place according to
law. We see that the petition has become
infructuous by passage of time and we do not wish
to keep the petition pending for any purpose.
We do not wish to enter into merits i.e. legality
or otherwise of the Ordinance in question. Writ
petition, being infructuous, stands dismissed.
Rule discharged. No costs.
(K.U.CHANDIWAL) (S.B.DESHMUKH) JUDGE JUDGE
agp/4514-01wp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to entertain a writ petition challenging an Ordinance amending the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Prakash s/o Kamlakar Pathak
The State of Maharashtra
The Collector & District Election Officer, Latur
The State Election Commissioner, Maharashtra State, Mumbai
The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Latur
S.B. Deshmukh
K.U. Chandiwala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court