BALESHWAR DAYAL JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was elected as President of the Municipal Council Nagda, District Ujjain (hereinafter referred to as Municipal Council), has approached this Court through the present petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by raising a challenge against the order dated July 29, 2006 passed by the State Government under Section 41-A of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act), whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be removed from the post of President.

(2.) In a direct election which was held in the year 2005, the petitioner Baleshwar Dayal Jaiswal, was elected as President of Municipal Council Nagda, District Ujjain. It is claimed by the petitioner that in the aforesaid election for 36 Municipal Wards, Bharatiya Janta Party had won 27 seats, Indian National Congress had won 7 seats whereas 2 remaining seats were won by the independent candidates. The petitioner has also stated that for the first time in his political career, he was elected as Alderman in the first elections of the Municipal Council held in the year 1980. However, the said elections were declared null and void. Later on, in the elections held in the year 1983, the petitioner was elected as the President of the Municipal Council and acted in the said capacity from the year 1983 till the year 1988. According to the petitioner, no elections to the Municipal Council were held from the year 1989 till 1992, when the Sub Divisional Officer was appointed as the Administrator of the Municipal Council. In the fresh elections held in the year 1993, according to the petitioner, his panel had won 21 seats out of 30 seats and as such the petitioner was elected as the President of the Municipal Council, once again, and remained in that capacity from the year 1993 till the year 1999. For the elections held in the year 2000, the post of the President of the Municipal Council Nagda was reserved for a woman candidate and as such the petitioner did not contest the said elections. When fresh elections again took place in the year 2005, in a direct election for the post of President, the petitioner was again elected directly as the President of the Municipal Council. The petitioner has claimed that since the Councillors belonging to the Bharatiya Janta Party wanted to elect their own person as the President, therefore, with a view to remove the petitioner from the said post, they started making complaints against him to the State Government. Various complaints were made from time to time.

(3.) It appears from the record that a complaint was again made by the Block President of Bhartiya Janta Party Nagda and all the Municipal Councillors belonging to the said Party against the petitioner in the month of August 2005. Copies of the said complaints were sent to various authorities including the Chief Minister of the State and the Minister Urban Administration and Development. On receipt of the aforesaid complaint, the Minister Urban Administration and Development issued a communication dated August 13, 2005 to the Secretary, Urban Administration and Development Department, to hold an enquiry into the allegations made in the said complaint and accordingly, submit a report to the Minister and also to take appropriate action in the matter. A copy of the aforesaid communication issued by the Minister to the Secretary of the department, along with complaint submitted by the Councillors, is available on the record as Annexure R-2, appended with the reply filed by respondents No. 1 to 3. It appears, that on the basis of the directions issued by the Minister, a fact-finding enquiry was ordered by the Secretary of the Department. The aforesaid enquiry was entrusted to the Deputy Director, respondent No. 2. Since it was a mere fact-finding enquiry, therefore, neither the petitioner was required to be associated with the said enquiry, nor was he so associated. Various allegations levelled by the complainant Councillors against the petitioner were gone into by the aforesaid Enquiry Officer, respondent No. 2 and a report dated September 5, 2005 was submitted by him in this regard. A copy of the aforesaid factfinding report is appended as Annexure-A with the petition. It may be relevant to notice here that in the aforesaid factfinding enquiry itself, the petitioner was exonerated from some of the allegations levelled against him.