CHIMANBHAI ASHABHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this petition relates to the impending elections to Nadiad Municipality. The term of Nadiad Municipal council expired on 23rd February 1978. The Government extended its term until 23 May 1978. In October 1977 the Collector asked the municipality to send its proposals for de-limitation of wards and the number of seats to be allotted to each ward with reservation for women and members of the scheduled castes. On 24th October 1977 a meeting of the municipal council was held. It was resolved to authorise three persons to enter into consultation with the Collector and the Government and to decide delimitation of wards and other matters. These three persons held consultation with tie Collector. In a formal letter one of the members communicated the proposals to the Collector. The proposals which these three persons made were not placed before the municipal council or before its executive committee. On 17th February 1978 the State Government issued the delimitation order. It was substantially in accordance with the proposals made by these three persons. On 21st February 1978 a corrigendum was issued. On 1st March 1978 the Collector fixed the election programme.

(2.) In this petition the petitioner challenges the de-limitation notification issued by the State Government on 17th February 1978. The ground of challenge is that the impugned notification has not been issued in compliance with the provisions of sub-sec. (1) of sec. 7 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 Mr. Takwani who appears on behalf of the Collector of Kaira has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of this petition. According to him this petition has been barred by gross delay and laches. The facts which he has pressed into service are as follows:

(3.) On 24th October 1977 the municipal council authorised three persons to enter into consultations with the State Government through the Collector. On 15th December 1977 they held consultations with the Collector. On 33th December 1977 the Collector forwarded his proposals to the State Government. On 17th February 1978 the Government issued the impugned de-limitation notification. On 1st March 1978 the election programme was announced. Nominations were required to be filed between 10 April 1978 and 14th April 1978. This petition was filed on 12th April 1978. Mr. Takwani has tried to argue that the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of this case ought not to have waited for two months to file this petition. In any case after having known on 17th February 1978 that the Government had issued the de-limitation notifi- cation he ought to have approached this Court and sought the relies. He allowed time to pass and also allowed the election programme to be announced on 1st March 1978. He also allowed time to run thereafter and when the period for filing nominations arrived he filed this petition. According to him therefore the petitioner is guilty of acquiescence and the petition is hit by delay and laches. It cannot be gainsaid that there is some substance in what Mr. Takwani has argued. If the petitioner wanted the relief in a matter like this he ought not to have allowed two months to pass. In any case he ought to have approached this Court much earlier so that without disturbing the election programme the relief could have been granted to him if the facts and circumstances of his case warranted it to be granted. However I do not propose to dismiss the petition in limine on this ground because in my opinion it is necessary to set at rest the controversy particularly when polling has yet not been held 7 May 1978 is the day of polling.