MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Vs. GOVT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition is the Municipal Council, Eluru, represented by its Chairman Sri Nandi Satyanarayana. It challenges G.O. Ms. No. 46, Municipal Administration dt. 28-1-1986. By means of G.O. Ms. No. 46 the Government had in purported exercise of its power under S.62(I), Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965, directed dissolution of the Municipal Council, Eluru with effect from 30-1-86 and also directed its reconstitution with effect from 30-1-1988. The Eluru Municipality was constituted under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. Elections to the Municipal Council were last held in August 1981, and the term of that elected body would expire on July, 1986. The life of this body was always turbulent. On 6-5-1985, the then Chairman of the Municipal Council was removed from Office through a resolution of no-confidence motion passed by the requisite majority of the Eluru Municipality. Thereafter, on 21-5-1985, the present Chairman was elected. This was followed by complaints made in June, 1985 against the maladministration of the Municipal Council. On receipt of those complaints by the Government, an Officer of the rank of Joint Director of Municipal Administration was deputed to enquire into those allegations made against the Municipal Council. The Joint Director, Municipal Administration held inquiry into those complaints from 22-6-1985 to 26-6-1985 and submitted his report to the Government on 29-6-1985. Acting on the basis of the report submitted by the Joint Director, Municipal Administration, the Government had issued a show cause notice to the Municipal Council, Eluru on 4-9-1985. That notice was issued under S.62(4) of the A. P. Municipalities Act, 1965. The notice frankly stated that the Government has received complaints about the abuse of power and position by the Eluru Municipal Council and that those complaints were got enquired into by the Joint Director, Municipal Administration and that the Joint Director reported that out of the 9 allegations leveled against the Council only 4 allegations were proved and that there were cases of abuse of power made out and disobedience and disregard to the instructions issued and provisions made in the Act and the Rules proved and also display of financial disinterestedness by the Municipal Council established. On that basis, the Government called upon the Municipal Council, Eluru to show cause within one month as to why action of dissolution should not be taken against the Municipal Council. Along with the show cause notice a copy of the inquiry report submitted by the Joint Director of the Municipal Administration was enclosed to enable the Municipal Council to peruse the same. The Municipal Council submitted its explanation on 4-10-85. The Government on a consideration of that Explanation passed G.O. Ms. No. 46, M.A. dt. 28-1-1986 dissolving the Municipal Council, Eluru with effect from 30-1-1986 and reconstituting it with effect from 30-1-1988. It is this order of the Government of Andhra Pradesh dissolving the Eluru Municipal Council that has been challenged in this writ petition.

(2.) The first ground on which the impugned order has been questioned was that the order is vitiated by mala fides. The allegations made in the writ petition are that the present Chairman of the Municipal Council belongs to Congress (I) Party, whereas the previous Chairman after the removal from Office by the above mentioned no-confidence motion joined the Telugu Desam Party and that the latter with the active co-operation of the local T.D.P., M.L.A. Sri M. Ranga Rao on the Government got the Council itself dissolved with the idea of putting an end to the Chairmanship of the present incumbent. It was also alleged that the local M.L.A. had a special grievance against the present Chairman as the present Chairman contested against him in the 1985 Assembly elections. It is alleged that the local M.L.A. and the previous Chairman were closely connected politically and the local M.L.A. had been crestfallen with the passing of the no-confidence motion against the previous Chairman, and that, therefore, they engineered the issuance of the show cause notice and the dissolution of the Municipal Council.

(3.) Charges of mala fides if proved would invalidate an order passed by a public functionary no matter whether that functionary is a Minister or a permanent Government servant. Exercise of public power is a sacred trust. That can be discharged only honestly and uprightly and without being influenced by party considerations. It was said of the great statesman, Sri C. Rajagopala Chary, that when he was approached by his party men to order the dissolution of the Cuddapah Dist. Board then under the control of the Justice Party the great Chief Minister of Madras bluntly refused to accede to the request of his partymen and showed them the exit way of his chambers. Whatever may be the importance of the role that ethical standards would play in one's own private life, it is clear that public democratic life cannot survive except by strict observance of higher ethical standards. That is why in law it is stated... "....No judgement of a Court on order of a Minister can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud."