MAHENDRAKUMAR KHODIDAS PATEL Vs. DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.N.V.Anjaria, learned Counsel for the respondent-Election Commission and Patan Municipality, and Mr.H.M.Prachchhak, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-State, appear and waive service of Rule.

(2.) Number of arguments were raised in support of pleadings that the administrators could not be appointed and special reliance was placed on Section- 281 of the Municipalities Act, to contend that the process of election should start within reasonable time and should be concluded within reasonable time, but, after finding that Section-281 is in relation to the transitory provision, which was to be made effective in light of 1993 Amendment, the point was given up.

(3.) The learned Counsel for both the petitioners, however, submitted that the State Government cannot be allowed to run the Municipalities with their Administrators nor the pawns can be placed in place of the elected authorities. We asked the learned Counsel for the Election Commission to inform us that within what time, the preparation of electoral rolls would be completed, the exercise of delimitation would be taken up and the election process would be brought to its logical end. To this, the Election Commission has filed an affidavit of one Mr.Pravin, son of Chimanlal Barot, who happens to be the Deputy Election Commissioner of the State Election Commission, contending that the elections for as many as 50 Municipalities would be completed by the end of October-2005 and for Mehsana Municipality, in view of the difficult circumstances, the elections would be completed by 31st December, 2005.