SURESH MADHAORAO BHANGE Vs. COLLECTOR WARDHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed by the Collector, Wardha on 9-5-1988 (Annexure-M) disqualifying the six petitioners from being Councillors of the Zilla Parishad, Wardha and the consequential order issued by the State Government on 17-5-1988 appointing the Chief Executive Officers Zilla Parishad, Wardha as Authorised Officer under section 91b (b) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act have been challenged in this writ petition.

(2.) THERE were elections to the Zilla Parishad at Wardha in 1979 of so and the petitioners Nos. 1 and 3 to 6 contested those elections on the official symbol of Congress- (I) and they were elected on that symbol. Other persons have also contested the elections and they were also elected. One Mr. Raut was elected as President of the Zilla Parishad. One Mr. Ingole (present respondent No. 4) was elected as a Vice President. One Mr. Gopal Tukaramji Zate (respondent No. 5) was elected a Chairman of the Works and Health Committee of the Zilla Parishad. They also belong to the congress- (I) party. Special meeting of the Zilla Parishad was sought to be convened on 18-12-1987 for consideration of the motion of no-confidence against the President and the Vice-President. The General Secretary of the Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee issued a letter dated 7-12-1987 not to vote in favour of the motion of no confidence. Inspite of this directive from the party, the petitioners voted in favour of the motion of no-confidence. The motion was passed. Another meeting was sought to be convened on 28-12-1987, for considering the motion of no confidence against Gopal Tukaramji Zate. The Secretary of the Maharashtra Pradesh Committee Congress- (I) issued a directive to all the members of the Zilla Parishad not to vote in favour of that motion as a result of that mandate, the petitioner No. 1 to 6 voted in favour of that motion as a result of which the motion came to be passed.

(3.) THREE petitions came to be filed against the present petitioners and others under section 3 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Disqualification Act) before the Collector, Wardha. It was alleged that the petitioners and others, voted contrary to the directives issued by the Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee (1) without obtaining any prior permission and therefore, they made themselves liable to the disqualification under section 3 (i) of the Disqualification Act. It was their case that all the petitioners and others were elected to the Zilla Parishad on the Congress (I) ticket and they formed the Zilla Parishad party after the elections. Inspite of the fact that the appropriate authority issued the letter with a mandate not to vote in favour of the no-confidence motion, these petitioners and others acted contrary to the mandate, as a result of which the motion came to be passed and as such they have incurred the disqualification under section 3 (1) (b) of the Disqualification Act.