R LALRAMTHANGA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred by 2 nominated members of the Chaltlang Village Council. According to them, the said Village Council constituted under the Lushai Hills District (Village Council) Act, 1953 consists of 8 members, out of which 6 are to be elected and 2 are to be nominated as per provision of Section 3 (3) of the said Act.The notification nominating the writ petitioners reads as follows :-

(2.) In pursuance of the aforesaid notification, the writ petitioners assumed office and have been discharging their functions as members. The Village Council was functioning smoothly in the best interest of the people. After installation of the new Government in the month of November, 1998, a notification was issued on 27-1-99 terminating the membership of the petitioners and appointing the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as members.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners that members nominated to the Village Council in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Act are to hold office during the pleasure of the Government. The tenure of office of the nominated members is co-extensive with the tenure of the village Council. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, termination of the membership of the writ petitioners without any opportunity being afforded to them to show cause is bad in law. The learned Counsel further argued that the notification dated 27-1-99 is not informed by reason and, as such, the Court may declare the said notification dated 27-1-98 as unsustainable in law. Mr. Vaiphei, learned Assistant Advocate General relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in (1993) 2 SCC 242 : (AIR 1993 SC 1440) submitted that nominated members are to hold office during the pleasure of the Government and, as such, the State is absolutely free to withdraw the nomination at any time without any notice.