MOHAMMAD ABDUL KHADER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these writ appeals are directed against a common judgment dt. 28-3-1984 in W.P. Nos. 4169 and 5398 of 1984. Sri Mohmmad Abdul Khadar appellant in W.A. No. 689 of 1984 was elected as Chairman of Municipal Council, Warrangal on 25-8-1981. The Municipal Council consists of 44 elected councillors and six ex-officio councillors. 25 elected councillors gave a written notice on 13-2-1984 of intention to move a motion expressing want of confidence in the Chairman. On the very same day, notice was issued from the office of the Collector, Warrangal district signed by the Joint Collecto, Warrangal to all the councillors informing them that a meeting of all the elected councillors including ex-officio councillors of Warrangal Municipality will be convened on 2-3-1984 at 11 a.m. at Municipal office, Warrangal to consider the notion. In the meeting held on 2-3-1984 the motion of no confidence was carried with the support of the requisite number of councillors as required under the provisions of S.46 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and a per the provisions of the said section the Chairman shall be d3emed to have been removed with immediate effect. Questioning the validity of the A.P. Municipalities (Amendment) Act No. 13 of 1983 and the notice in Rc. No. B7/1570/84 dt. 13-2-1984 convening a meeting of the councillors to consider the motion of no confidence against the Chairman, W.P. No. 4169 of 1984 was filed by the then Chariman Sri Mohammed Abdul Khader. After the motion was carried with the support of the requisite majority of councillors, the Joint Collector, Warrangal issued the notice in Rc. No. B7/1570/84 dt. 6-3-84 convening a special meeting on 19-3-1984 at 11 A.M. of the Councillors at the Municipal office, Warrangal to conduct the election of the Chairman. Aggrieved by this notice, one of the elected councillors Sri Chennuboyina Satyanarayana filed W.P. No. 5398 of 1984. Both the Writ Petitions were heard and dismissed by the learned single Judge having found no substance in any one of the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners in the two writ petitions.

(2.) In these Writ Appeals, three contentions are advanced. They are (1) the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities (Amendment) Act No. 13 of 1983 is ultra vires Arts. 200 and 201 of the Constitution. (2) under S.46 of the Act the ex-officio councillors have no right to participate in meeting convened to consider the motion of no confidence and to cast their vote and (3) as per the definition of the word "council" and the constitution of the Municipal council under S.5 of the act, the ex-officio councillors do not form part of the Municipal Council and have no right to vote.

(3.) Under S.46 of the Act, the councillors of a Municipality have the right to express no confidence in the chairman or vice-chairman and the section prescribes the procedure for giving a written notice of intention to move the motion, to convene a meeting for consideration of the said motion and confers right on the councillors, both elected and ex-officio to participate in such meeting and to cast vote. Under S.46 prior to its amendment by Act No. 13 of 1983, notice of the meeting convened to consider the motion of no confidence is required to be given only to the elected councillors. But by virtue of the Andhra pradesh Municipalities (Amendment) Act, 1983, S.46 has been amended.