PU MYLLAI HLYCHHO Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>P.P.NAOLEKAR, CJ</DJG>- The question involved in both these appeals are analogous and, therefore, are decided together.

(2.) Facts in brief relevant for the purposes of adjudication of the question in both these cases are: The Mara Autonomous District Council (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'MADC') has been constituted as per the provisions of Paragaraph 20B of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as the Sixth Schedule) and is a body corporate. The MADC consisted of 19 elected members elected through adult franchise and a maximum of four nominated members to be appointed by the Governor of Mizoram for a term of five years with effect from the first sitting of the Council. After the election of the members of MADC held on 9.2.2000, (1) Mrs Lalbaiaktluangi Sailo, (2) Mr Myllai Hlychho, (3) Mr C. Lawbei and (4) Mr S. Lalremthanga, were appointed as nominated members of MADC by the Governor of Mizoram on 8.8.2000, in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-para (1) of paragraph 2 of the Sixth Schedule read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Mizoram Autonomous District Councils (Constitution and Conduct of Business of the District Councils) Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1974 rules') as amended from time to time. Shri K. Chiama, one of the elected members of the MADC, had submitted a notice of No Confidence Motion to the Secretary, MADC, against the then Executive Committee of MADC on 4.12.2001. The Chairman had granted leave for the No Confidence Motion and the No Confidence Motion was to be discussed and voted on 6.12.2001 as fixed by the Chairman. On 5.12.2001 the appointment/ nomination of the members appointed on 8.8.2000 was terminated by notification issued under Memo No. DCA/E-108/88 dated 5.12.2001. The termination order was issued in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-paragraph 6(A) of paragraph 2 of the Sixth Schedule read with sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 of the 1974 Rules. Thereafter another notification under Memo No. DCA/E-108/88 dated 6.12.2001, was issued by the respondent No. 2, Secretary to the Government of Mizoram, District Council Affairs Department, nominating (1) Mr. Nolua, (2) Mrs. Lalbaiaktlungai Sailo, (3) Mr Chialo and (4) Mr H. Valali as members of the MADC in place of the previously nominated members whose membership was terminated. The date fixed for discussion and voting of the No Confidence Motion was postponed from 6.12.2001 to 7.12.2001.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of termination and nomination of new members, the appellants in WA No. 181 of 2002 filed a writ petition, which was registered as Writ Petition (C) No. 109/ 2001 before the Aizawl Bench of the Gauhati High Court. By order dated 12.12.2001 the High Court has suspended the Notification dated 6.12.2001 whereunder new members of MADC were appointed, till the disposal of the writ petition. Aggrieved by the order of suspension, the State of Mizoram and its Secretary preferred an appeal before the Division Bench, being Writ Appeal No. 518/2001. The Division Bench by order dated 21.12.2001 passed an ex-parte order and stayed the order dated 12.12.2001 passed by the learned Single Judge. Ultimately, the Division Bench by its order dated 31.1.2002 disposed of the writ appeal with a direction that the entire matter be heard by the learned Single Judge.