KISAN BHAGUJI BURKLE Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the question arising in this petition is said to be a question which also arises in other petitions, we have heard M/s. Masodkar and Kukday as Intervenes, as they are interested in Special Civil Application No. 222/65 and Special Civil Application No. 77/65 in addition to Mr. Palshikar for the petitioner. The short question that arises for determination is as to the effect of Ordinance No. V of 1964 promulgated by the Governor of Maharashtra and Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 1964, These laws were passed in order to stay general elections of Municipalities in Maharashtra State and for making consequential provisions and the question that has to be determined is, what is the effect of their provisions so far as the office of President of a municipality is concerned.

(2.) IN the present petition, the facts in brief are as follows. We are concerned with the Nandura Municipal Committee. The general elections to that Municipal Committee were held in July 1959 and the notification of election of its present members was published in the Gazette on August 6, 1959. The result of that publication was that under the provisions of Section 16(2) of the C.P. and Berar Municipalities Act those members were entitled to continue in office for a period of five years from the said date till August 5, 1964. Thus, their term of office would have expired on that date; but first of all, the State Government intervened to extend their term of office till November 6, 1964, under the powers given to them under Section 16(2 -4) of the Act. While the term of office of the members thus stood extended till November 6, 1964, the Governor of Maharashtra promulgated Ordinance V of 1964. By that Ordinance the life of the Councillors or members was further extended till December 31, 1965. The Ordinance came into force on September 30, 19?4, but was later replaced by Mah. Act No. XLII of 1964, which came into force on December 16, 1964. Therefore, today the Councillors or members of this Municipal Committee are continuing to hold office by virtue of Act No. XLTI of 1964. It is explained that the reason for all this legislative activity is that the State is about to enact a new law to provide a new and uniform pattern of administration for municipalities in the entire State and till then it was considered expedient that no new general elections should be held but that the status quo should be maintained.

(3.) THE provisions of Section 18 of the C. P, and Berar Municipalities Act, as amended by Bombay Act No. XVI of 1959, govern the election and continuance in office of the President of a Municipality and Sub -section (2) thereof prescribes that each Committee shall have a President who shall be elected by the members from among their number, and Sub -section (3) lays down the period for which he should hold office. Sub -section (3) runs as follows: Save as otherwise provided in this Act, - (a) the President shall hold office for such term, not less than one year or not less than the residue of the term of office of the Committee, whichever is less, and not exceeding three years, as the Committee shall, previous to the election of the President, determine or until the expiry within the said term of his term of office as member, but shall be eligible for re -election; and (b) the Vice -President shall hold office during the term of office of the President who appoints him: Provided that the term of office of such President or Vice -President shall be deemed -to extend to, and expire with, the date on which his successor is elected or appointed, as the case may be: Provided further that where the term of office of a Committee is extended under this Act, the President and Vice -President holding office immediately before the date with effect from which such term is extended shall continue to hold their respective offices until the date on which the term so extended expires.