RAM KUMAR GOYAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the President of the Municipal Board Fatehpur Sikri, Distt. Agra (hereinafter referred to as the Board) has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution with the principal prayer that Smt. Sharda Devi alias Rama Rani and Bhagwan Das, the respondents no. 4 and 5 respectively, should not be administered the oath of office as nominated members of the Board. However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner confined this petition to Smt. Sharda Devi alias Rama Rani the respondent no. 4 and has made a statement that no relief is being claimed against the respondent no. 5.

(2.) THE material averments are these. By a notification dated 12th January, 1989, the State Government in the purported exercise of powers under section 9 of the U. P. Municipalities Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) nominated Smt. Sharda Devi, wife of Sri Murari Lal Mittal as a member of the Board. On 2nd February, 1989, the petitioner made a representation to the Special Secretary (Nagar Vikas Anubhag) stating therein that no lady by the name Sharda Devi wife of Sri Murari Lal Mittal was residing in Fatehpur Sikri A request was made that the nomination of Smt. Sharda Devi may be rescinded and in her place one Smt. Indra, wife of Sri Padam Chand Agarwal may be nominated. On 2nd February, 1989, the District Magistrate, directed the petitioner to convene a meeting of the Board for the purpose of administering oath to the nominated members. On 8th February, 1989, the petitioner made a representation to the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh wherein he objected to the nomination of respondents no 4 and 5. On 10 February, 1989, the Minister concerned directed the Secretary of the Department concerned to call for a report from the District Magistrate and also directed the District Magistrate to stay further action in the meanwhile. On 16th February, 1989, the Secretary in the Government called for a detailed information from the District Magistrate in regard to the complaint that Smt. Sharda Devi was not residing within the limits of the Board and that her real name was Rama Devi. THE operation of the notification dated 12th January, 1989, nominating the respondents no. 4 and 5 was also stayed. On 27th February, 1989, the petitioner addressed another communication to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Agra, reiterating that Smt. Rama Devi was not residing within the limits of the Board. On 11th April, 1989, a telex message was sent by the Secretary in the Government of Uttar Pradesh, Nagar Vikash Anubhag, to the District Magistrate, Agra By this message a correction was made in the notification dated 12th January, 1989, to the effect that instead of Sharda Devi wife of Sri Murari Lal Mittal, Smt. Sharda Devi alias Rama Rani wife of Sri Murari Lal Mittal may be read. A direction was also given that the swearing in ceremony of Smt Sharda Devi alias Rama Rani as a nominated member of the Board may be arranged at once. On 12th April, 1989, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, informed the petitioner that he (the Sub-Divisional Magistrate) would reach the office of the Board in Fatehpur Sikri on 13th April, 1989, at 3 P. M. to administer oath to the nominated members. THE legality of the telex message dated 11th April, 1989 is being impugned in the present petition.

(3.) SECTION 9 of the Act deals with the normal composition of the Board in contrast to the provisions of SECTION 10 which empowers the State Government to vary the composition of the Board. SECTION 9 provides that the elected members shall not be less than 10 and not more than 40 as the State Government may by a notification in the official gazette specify. The first proviso to this provision empowers the State Government to nominate a woman as member of the Board concerned only if none of the members elected is a woman. Therefore, the contingency to nominate a woman as a member of the Board will arise only after the election of the members of the Board has taken place and no woman has been elected as one of the members. These features also indicate that the expression "chosen to fill a seat on a Board" as used in SECTION 13-C is confined to the election of a person as member of the Board.