DEBABRATA KALOY Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.K.Bhowmik, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr.S.Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.T.K.Roy, learned Advocate General, Tripura, assisted by Mr. S.Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr.B.R.Bhattacharjee, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A.Ghosh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 as well as Mr.B .Das, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr.A.Ghosh, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5.

(2.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner for quashing the impugned notice dated 24.07.2003, the impugned list of business dated 29.07.2003, the impugned bulletin dated 29.07.2003 and the impugned proceedings and resolution of the meeting of Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (hereinafter called 'TTAADC') held on 31.07.2003 and all subsequent and consequential actions of the respondents and also for directing the respondents to allow the Executive Committee headed by him to continue in the Office.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the TTAADC is an Autonomous District Council formed under 6th schedule of the Constitution of India and that the law governing TTAADC is regulated by the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (Constitution, Election and Conduct of Business) Rules. 1985 (hereinafter reffered to as "1985 Rules"). It is stated by the petitioner that the District Council is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal and that the District Council consists of 28 members, who are elected on the basis of adult sufferage from Territorial constituencies, out of which 25 membership of the Territorial Constituencies are reserved for Scheduled Tribes. The Governor of Tripura is vested with the power to nominate not more than two persons as members of the District Council. The writ petitioner further states that the elected members of the District Council hold office for a term of five years from the date of appointment for the first meeting of the Council after the general election to the District Council. It is also stated that the last election of the TTAADC was held in the month of May, 2000, wherein 28 members were elected, out of which one member vacated his office. With two members nominated by the Governor, the total membership strength at present is 29. The writ petition further states that out of 29 members presently constituting the TTAADC, 18 members belong to I.N.P.T party, whereas 9 members belong to C.P.I(M) party. It is also stated that in the said District Council the I.N.P.T party is having 18 members and having commanded a majority in the District Council, the I.N.P.T party is governing the District Council and that the respondent No.3 is the Chairman of the TTAADC since 2000 and that the respondent No.3 also belongs to the I.N.P.T party. The petitioner further states that he has learnt from reliable sources that a group of 7 members of the District Council, including the respondent No.3 and one Executive member, all of whom belonging to I.N.P.T party, have joined hands with the elected members of the C.P.I(M) party and hatched a conspiracy to remove the present Executive Committee in a most unconstitutional manner and that in furtherance of the common object, the respondent No.2 issued the notice dated 24.07.2003 for convening a meeting of the District Council on 31.07.2003 at 11.00 a.m. in the Council Bhawan at Khumulwng by giving 7 days notice to all members purportedly on the basis of requisition made in writing 19 members of the Council to convene such a meeting in terms of the proviso to Rule 165(2) read with Rule 199(1) and Rule 175 of the 1985 Rules. The petitioner also states that he came to learn that the aforesaid group of 7 members of the Council called on the Governor of Tripura and made a written submission on 22.7.2003 intimating him the fact of deserting the I.N.P.T party by the said group and also their intention to form a new political party. The writ petition further states that on 24.7.2003 a notice under Rule 192 of the 1985 Rules was submitted by the 9 members of the TTAADC to the respondent No.4 intimating their intention to move a resolution for removal of the respondent No.3 from the office of the Chairman ofTTAADC under Clause (c) of Rule 155 of the 1985 Rules and the same was also brought to the notice of the Governor of Tripura by the letter dated 26.7.2003 and also about the illegal notice dated 24.07.2003 and requested His Excellency for cancellation of the summons issued on 24.7.2003 and also for directing the Secretary of TTAADC to first convene a meeting of the Council for consideration of the notice for removal of respondent No.3. The writ petition also states that the respondent No.4 by the letter dated 29.7.2003 forwarded the list of business to be transacted, wherein, surprisingly the subject of No Confidence Motion and also against whom the No Confidence Motion would be moved were not mentioned and that on 31.7.2003 at the beginning of the meeting of the TTAADC the bulletin dated 29.7.2003 was furnished to the members including the petitioner in the house and the said bulletin contained a motion (discussion on matters of urgent public importance for short duration) to be moved by Shri Radha Charan Deb Barma, leader of the opposition with the following subject: -