MADAN BABANRAO ZADE Vs. MINISTER OF STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AGP for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and learned counsel for respondent No. 4.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 24-4-1998 passed by the respondent No. 1 while exercising powers under section 55-B of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, on the ground that the order impugned is the interim order and the final declaration of disqualification under section 55-B of the Act would not have been given at the interlocutory stage by the state Government before passing the final order, and therefore, the order impugned is not sustainable. Mr. Gordey, learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that even in the order, which is interim in nature, no reasons as such are given for holding that the petitioner has incurred disqualification under section 55-B of the act and in absence of reasons, impugned order cannot be sustained in law and is required to be quashed and set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner lastly contended that even the period for which the petitioner was disqualified by the impugned order dated 24-6-1998 i. e. 6 years is also over in April, 2004.

(3.) The learned AGP for the State though not disputed that the order impugned is interim in nature, however, submitted that the final order could not be passed because of the interim order passed by this Court in the present writ petition. The learned AGP further contended that even otherwise the period for which the petitioner was disqualified has come to an end in April, 2004 and therefore, the effect of the impugned order does not survive after April, 2004.