Dismissed

Tarachand Dhanji Bacchav v. State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC14 Mar 2012WP/172/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench dismissed the writ petition challenging the State Election Commission's decision to use 2001 census data instead of 2011 data for village population calculations. The court held the finding that 2011 provisional figures were unavailable was correct.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as it was found to be devoid of merits due to the unavailability of 2011 provisional census figures for the villages in question.

Tarachand Dhanji Bacchav Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

WP 172/2012 1/5 S.H.HADAP

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.172 OF 2012

¶4

Tarachand Dhanji Bacchav .. Petitioner V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶5

.. Respondents

¶6

Mr.J.D.Khairnar for the petitioner.

¶7

Mr.Prashant Darandale, AGP for Respondent No.1. Mr.Sachindra Shetye for Respondent No.2. Mr.Ajay Magdum i/by Mr.S.S.Patwardhan for Respondent No.3.

¶8

CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR & N.M.JAMDAR, JJ.

¶9

DATE: 14^th March, 2012.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has asked for direction against Respondent No.2 - the State Election Commission, to calculate the number of councilors for the Soygaon, Maldhe, Sayane (Budruk), Daregaon, Dyane, Bhaigaon and the Collector Patta, as per the latest census of 2011 and not on the basis of the census of 2001.

¶12

The argument proceeds that the option of relying on the final relevant figures of the census immediately preceding the latest census, can be invoked by the State Election Commission, only if

¶13

WP 172/2012 2/5 S.H.HADAP

¶14

the relevant final or provisional figures of the latest census pending publication of final figures of the latest census, are not available.

¶15

In the petition it is stated that the total figure of the provisional population of the above mentioned villages was very much available with the State and Respondent No.2 - the State Election Commission. Inspite of that, the State Election Commission has proceeded on the basis of census figures of 2001 i.e. the census immediately preceding the latest census.

¶16

To buttress this submission, emphasis is placed on the explanation below Section 5(3) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. The same reads thus:-

¶17

Explanation: for the purpose of this Act, the expression “latest census figures” obtaining in sub-section (3), shall mean -

¶18

(a) the figures of the latest census finally published and pending publication of final figures of the latest census shall mean the provisional figures published of such census; and

¶19

(b) where the relevant final or provisional figures of the latest census are not available, the final relevant figures of the census immediately preceding the latest census.

¶20

On plain language of the above provision, it is noticed that the

¶21

State Election Commission is obliged to rely on the information available on the basis of the final figures of the latest census

¶22

WP 172/2012 3/5 S.H.HADAP

¶23

which are pending publication. The explanation itself clarifies the meaning of “the provisional figures published of such census”. Thus understood, the petitioner ought to have pleaded and established that the provisional figures of the latest census are pending publication. That is not the statement made in the petition.

¶24

Be that as it may, during the course of hearing, we called upon the State Election Commission to place on record the relevant factual position, and in particular, whether the figures of the latest census are pending publication. In response thereto, in the affidavit of Mr.Avinash Sanas, Assistant Commissioner, State Election Commission, Maharashtra, it is stated in paragraph Nos.12 & 13 as under:

¶25

“12. The office of Directorate Census operation informed the office of State Election Commission that the provisional census figures in respect of 7 villages in question has not been released. It is further clarified in the said letter that the village viz. population figures are expected to release in the middle of 2012.”

¶26

“13. I therefore most respectfully states that the provisional census figures of 2011 in respect of 7 villages in question are not released by the office of Directorate Census and therefore the latest available census figures of population of 2001 are considered in respect of 7 villages in question while doing exercise u/s.5 of the B.P.M.C.Act.”

¶27

WP 172/2012 4/5 S.H.HADAP

¶28

Counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments produced a document purported to be printout of the extract from the official website of the Census of India 2011, titled as the provisional population total figures pertaining to the Maharashtra. We cannot decide the matter on the basis of document now tendered across the bar in the absence of clear averments in the petition to that effect, and more particularly ignoring the statement made on affidavit by the responsible officer of the State Election Commission that the provisional census figures in respect of the said seven villages have not been released so far. The officer of the State Election Commission has stated those facts on the basis of communication received under the signature of Joint Director of Census Operations, Maharashtra, Mumbai, working under the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Directorate of Census Operations, Maharashtra.

¶29

The inter-departmental communication on which the petitioner relies, does not take the matter any further as in none of those documents it has been stated to the contrary. The petitioner relies on the communication received from the office of the Collector, Nashik. Even on a fair reading of the comments occurring therein,

¶30

WP 172/2012 5/5 S.H.HADAP

¶31

it does not even remotely suggest that the figures in respect of the latest census have, in fact, been finally published or for that matter pending publication; and more particularly before the date of formation of wards by the State Election Commission. As a matter of fact, this document at Exhibit ‘D’ at page 12A, on which reliance is placed, itself makes it clear that the information has not been published by the Director of Census, India.

¶32

Taking an overall view of the matter, petition is devoid of merits

¶33

and the same is dismissed.

¶34

(N.M. JAMDAR, J.)

¶35

(A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)

Tarachand Dhanji Bacchav v. State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarachand Dhanji Bacchav v. State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Machindra Bira Gophane Vs the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur and Ors.

Rajendra Dhondji Raorane Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shridhar Kisan Salve Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Social Justice and Special Assistance and Ors.

Samarth Co-Operative Consumers Central Stores Ltd. and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Golden Park Residents Association and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Inspector Incharge, Mumbra Police Station and Ors.

N. G. Heritage Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs the Dy. Registrar, Co-Operative Societies of Thane and Ors.