RATAN KUMAR DIXIT Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed praying for several reliefs and the principal reliefs are that the notification issued by the State Government providing for reservation of wards in all the eleven Nagar Nigams (Municipal Corporations) in the State be quashed and a direction be issued to the respondents not to proceed with the election in the Municipal Corporations until the exercise of determination of actual population of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and also the total population of different wards of Nagar Nigams is completed and the seats in the wards are reserved in accordance with law for different categories of persons who are entitled for reservation.

(2.) Petitioner Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are residents of and are registered as voters in Nagar Nigam, Allahabad. petitioner No. 2 is resident of and is registered as voter in Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and petitioner No. 5 is resident of and is registered as voter in Nagar Nigam, Aligarh. The respondents arrayed in the writ petition are State of U.P. Director, Local Bodies, State Election Commission, and the District Election Officers/District Magistrates, Allahabad, Gorakhpur and Aligarh.

(3.) Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the last census in the State of U.P. had been held in the year 1991 and the figures of population are available of the said census only and thereafter a rapid survey was done in the year 1994 with a view to determine the population of other backward classes alone. No fresh survey has been undertaken to determine the actual population of the different categories of persons namely, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes. The numbers of wards in the Nagar Nigams as per the Delimitation Order of 1995 done consequent upon the Constitution (74th Amendment) Act of 1992 were substantially increased. In Allahabad the number of wards which were 40 in the year 1991 have been increased to 70 in the year 1995 and in Gorakhpur and Aligarh they have been increased from 30 to 60 in the same period. However, for the purpose of forthcoming election of Nagar Nigams in the State which is scheduled to take place in November, 2000 no survey of population has been done either of the general category or of reserved category nor the population of individual wards has been ascertained. According to the learned counsel the mandatory requirement of sub-sec. (1) of S. 32 of U.P. Municipal Corporations Adhiniyam, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) had not been complied with, and therefore, the notification issued by the State Government regarding reservation of seats in different wards was wholly illegal. Learned counsel has thus urged that till such exercise was done and the provisions of sub-sec. (1) of S. 32 of the Act and also the directions issued by a Division Bench of this Court in Mukesh Ram Chandani v. State of U.P. (1996) 1 All WC 153 had been complied with, no election for electing Sabhasads of Nagar Nigam should be held in the State.