MUKESH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who was elected as Municipal Councillor, Jind unopposed from Ward No. 26, has impugned order of her suspension, which, according to her was passed to save the Rs. No Confidence Motion' moved by her and number of Councillors against the President Smt. Sudesh Kumari (respondent No. 7). The petitioner has approached the court crying loudly to allege malafides on the part of respondent No. 6 and against Rs. political bosses of Ruling/ Congress Party' without naming any such boss. Alleging malafide against unidentified political bosses is quite a vague manner of making allegations of malafides and would sound a bit irresponsible act. If wanted to, the petitioner could be rather specific in this regard and ought to have impleaded them also. Leaving this aspect, the facts in this case may now be noticed and would indicate that this suspension of the petitioner just at the time when there was a no confidence motion moved against the President of the Municipal Council may leave an impression that this action was not straight looking and was in violation of legal provision.

(2.) On 20.5.2010, the petitioner was elected unopposed as Municipal Councillor, Jind from ward No. 26. which has more than 2500 votes. Smt. Sudesh Kumari (impleaded as respondent No. 7 at the time of issuing notice on oral prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner) is the elected President of Municipal Council, Jind. The petitioner along with other 22 other Municipal Councillors constituting 2/3rd majority of the Council moved a requisition to the Deputy Commissioner, Jind against the President of the Council on the ground that her work and conduct was not good. These Councillors accordingly prayed for calling the meeting to pass the vote of Rs. No Confidence' against the President. It is averred that respondent No. 7 is a staunch Congress follower and has the blessing of political leaders of the Congress Party and, thus, they were more than keen to save her from being removed as President. The post of President of Municipal Council, Jind is reserved for female candidate. Petitioner claims to be a hot contender for this post and that is why she apprehends that the axe to incapacitate her to vote has fallen on her.

(3.) Petitioner received a communication dated 28.11.2011 from Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) (respondent No. 5) intimating that the Deputy Commissioner had appointed/authorised him to call a special meeting due to receipt of this no confidence motion against the President. He accordingly apprised the petitioner that special meeting was convened on 14.12.2011 at 11.00 AM in the Meeting Room of Municipal Council Jind. This meeting was not held on 14.12.2011. The petitioner then received another communication dated 19.12.2011 informing her that earlier meeting could not be held and that the meeting was convened on 3.1.2012 at 11.00 AM. As per the petitioner, in between, the political bigwigs of the ruling party resorted to pressurizing the Councillors not to participate in the meeting. The Councillors, however, did not succumb to the pressures.