GAURISHANKAR KREEDA MANDAL Vs. ANIL VEDVYAS GALGALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. By consent heard forthwith.

(2.) This petition has been filed seeking Writ of Quo Warranto calling upon respondents 3 to 5 to justify their nomination made by following the process of election, as nominated members of "L" Ward Committee of the first respondent Corporation, as contemplated by provisions of Section 50-TT (2)(c) of the Mumbai Corporation Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act" for the sake of brevity). Consequential reliefs of injunction are also sought prohibiting respondents 3 to 5 from functioning or acting as such nominated members etc.. A further relief in continuation of the aforesaid Writ of Quo-Warranto is also sought for directing these respondents to vacate their office as nominated members.

(3.) The petitioners have also sought for a further direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the first respondent Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as "the said Corporation" for the sake of brevity) and the second respondent the Municipal Secretary of the said Corporation, to forthwith ensure that the second and fourth petitioners are nominated as members in place of the contesting respondents. The aforesaid relief is sought for on the ground that the second petitioner has been nominated by the first petitioner organisation/trust and the fourth petitioner have been nominated by the third petitioner trust and that they were the only one who were qualified and/or eligible for such nomination in terms of the said Rules.