T K R SHARMA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KURNOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Member of the Legislative Assembly from the Kurnool constituency and by virtue of that position has become a member of the Zilla Parishad under Sec. 36 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act 35 of 1959 (hereinafter called the Zilla Parishads Act). Under cl. (viii) of Sec. 36(3), certain persons have to be elected in the prescribed manner by members specified in cls. (i) to (vii) from among the persons who are registered voters in the District but who are not already members, at a special meeting convened and presided over by the District Collector in accordance with the provisions of cl. (viii) of Sec. 36(3). Respondents 5 and 6 who are the sitting Municipal Councillors of Kurnool Municipality filed their nominations along with three others for being elected as members under sub-cls. (b) and (c) of cl. (viii). After the date for scrutiny of nominations was over on 1/9/1964 the 1st respondent, the District Collector, issued a notification notifying valid nominations for each of the three categories mentioned in cl. (viii)(a), (b) and (c). Two persons also have to be elected, who are interested in the rural development under sub-cl. (d) of cl. (viii) with respect to which there is no dispute. The only dispute in this writ petition relates to the validity of the nominations filed by respondents 2 to 6 in the categories under sub-cls. (a)(b) and (c) of cl. (viii). It is the contention of the petitioner that the first respondent ought to have rejected the nominations of respondents 2 to 6, as all of them are voters in the Kurnool Municipal area. The fact that the names of these respondents appear in the electoral roll of the same municipal area is however not denied. It is the contention of the petitioner that under the provisions of the Act only those persons who are voters in the district other than the municipal area alone ace competent to be elected as members under clause (viii) of Sec. 36(3); This contention is based upon a reading of the notification making the Zilla Parishads Act applicable with effect from 2/10/1959 in the whole State of Andhra Pradesh excluding (1) rhe schedule areas in Andhra area, (2) the areas within the jurisdiction of municipalities (3) the areas within the jurisdiction of the City Municipalities in Telangana area and (4) the areas within the jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation of the Cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad.

(2.) Reading Sec. 36 with the definitions referred to in Sec. 3 of the Madras District Boards Act, Sri Babul Reddy contends with great force that the Zilla Parishad is only constituted for the entire district minus the areas excluded by these definitions viz., district municipalities and scheduled districts and as such no voter who is not in the list of voters for this area can file his nomination for the purpose of Sec. 36(3)(viii).

(3.) The contention of the learned Government Pleader with equal force is that the mere fact that the Act is made applicable only to certain areas specified by the G.O. or otherwise does no conflict with the cooption for the good of the Zilla Parishad or persons residing outside those areas. It is true that even if Mr. Babul Reddy's contention is accepted that the Zilla Parishad Act does not apply to municipal areas, that does not by itself resolve the present controversy whether persons who are in the voters' list of the district pertaining to the municipality could validly file their nominations for being elected under Sec. 36(3)(viii). This question must be decided by a reference to the provisions of Sec. 36 itself and the general scheme of the Act. Was it the intention of the Legislature that Sec. 36(3)(viii) should be made applicable to persons from the voters list for that district including the municipal areas. That the Legislature has made exceptions in respect of Sec. 47(3) for the preparation of a plan in respect of the entire district viz., including the municipal areas is a matter which is beyond controversy. Apart from that, Sec. 43 deals with the Standing Committee of the Zilla Parishad. Proviso (1) to that Sec. lays down that in the case of the Standing Committee for planning and production, the subject mentioned in d. (1) of sub- Sec. (1), the Zilla Parishad shall elect in the prescribed manner one of the remaining seven members, in the Andhra area from among the chairmen of the municipalities in the district, and in the Telangana area from among the presidents of the city municipalities in the district who are not members of the Zilla Parishad, This provision clearly envisages not only the election of one of the seven members of the Standing Committee from among the Chairmen of the Municipalities in the District but further postulates that there may be other presidents of the city municipalities who are not members of the Zilla Parishad. Otherwise there was no meaning in the proviso restricting the election of the presidents of the municipalities to those who are not already members of the Zilla Parishad. This gives an indication and a clue to the constitution of the Zilla Parishads, which genarally have to administer for the welfare of the people of the entire district. The objects which the municipalities and the Zilla Parishads have to achieve being more or less identical, persons with experience in municipal administration can well be considered useful as members of the Zilla Parishad or its Standing Committee. With this postulate if we were to look at Sec. 36 and its provisions it is clear that the words 'a distirct', in the district or part thereof have different meanings to those given in the District Boards Act. It is well-recognised that the definition Sec. would ordinarily apply to the provisions of the Act unless any particular provision in the Act expressly or by intendment excludes it by giving to the words used therein a different meaning or a wider connotation. That this is so, is clear from the provisions of Sec. 36. We now propose to cursorily examine the provisions of this Sec. . Sub-Sec. (1) vests power in the Government to constitute a Zilla Parishad for a ditrict. Sub-Sec. (2) states that every Zilla Parishad shall by the name of the ditstrict for which it is constituted be a body corporate: in other words, the Zilla Parishad is to be known by the name of the district, which necessarily includes within its geographical limits the revenue district including the municipal areas. Sub- Sec. (3) provides for the persons who constitute the Zilla Parishad. CI. (1) provides that every Zilla Parishad shall consist of the following members, viz., every president of very panchayat samithi, ex-officio and the District Collector and the members of the Legislative Assembly of the State elected from the District. Here it may be noticed that the District Collector need not necessarily be a person belonging to the District nor members of the Legislative Assembly of the State elected from the district be residing only in the rural areas excluding municipality or be on the voters list of this restricted area. The proviso further suggests that if the Assembly constituency consists of portions of more than one district, the member of the Assembly is given the choice to be a member of only one of those Zilla Parishads. This again isan indication that the membership is not limited to only the rural areas excluding the muncipalities. While this is so, the Legislature specifically excluded a member of the Legislative Assembly representing a constituency the whole of which forms part of the local area within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. The prohibition in the second proviso to cl. (iii) of sub- sec. (3) of Sec. 36 by contrast makes, the meaning clearer vis. that there is no bar for members of the Assembly representing a constituency in the municipal areas from being members of the Zilla Parishads. Cl. (iv) empowers the Government to nominate members of the Legislative Coun-cil. Here again the proviso indicates that in the case of a member of the Legislative Council representing a territorial constituency, the Zilla Parishad of which he is specified as a member shall be of the district which comprises wholly such territorial constituency or shall be of the Zilla Parishad of his choice where such constituency comprises portions of more than one district. The second proviso states that in the case of a member of a Legislative Council not representing a territorial constitutency, the Zilla Parishad of which he is specified as member shall be of the district in which he is a registered voter, Cl. (iv) and its provisos make it abundantly clear that the territorial limits of the district are those co-terminus with the revenue district Therefore, the members of the Legislative Council who are from the muncipal areas or who are on the voters list of the district which means the entire district inclusive of the municipal areas, can be members of the Zilla Parishad. Similar is the case in respect of the members of the House of the People, who are elected from the constituency which forms part of the district; provided that a member of the House of the People representing a constituency which comprises portions of more than one district shall be the member of the Zilla Parishad of only one such district which he chooses. It also provides that he shall have the right to speak and otherwise to take part in the proceedings of any meeting of the-Zilla Parishad of any other district, the part of which is comprised in his constituency or its Standing Committee but shall not be entitled to vote at any such meeting; provided further that no member of the House of the People representing a constituency the whole of which forms part of the local area within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, shall be the member of the Zilla. Parishad of the Hyderabad district. Cl. (vi) states that such members of the. Council of States as the Government may by order specify shall also be members, provided that in the case of a member of the Council of States, the Zilla Parishad of which he is specified as a member shall be the Zilla Parishad of the district in which he is a registered voter. These provisions are similar to those which we have already read and which do not limit the representation by excluding the municipal areas, Clauses (v) and (vi) are again powers of nomination by the. Government. Cl. (vii) provides for every block for which no panchayat samithi is constituted, to elect one person who is not already a member but is a registered voter in that block elected in the prescribed manner, from among themselves in the Andhra area, by the presidents of the panchayats within such block and in the Telangana area, by the sarpanchs of the panchayats and the presidents of the town committees within such block. This provision is useful in construing the intention of the Legislature, in that where it wanted to clearly limit the representation it used specific words. It limited the representation to specific area, such as in this case to registered voters in that block. It is now necessary to consider clause (viii). CI. (viii) prior to the amendment was in the following terms: