SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short but important point which arises for determination in this case is whether the expression "the members of the Committee" used in Section 21 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) would include the members nominated by the Government under Section 9 (3) of the Act. An ancillary question which would need determination relates to the effect of amendment made in Section 9 (3) by the Haryana Municipal (Amendment) Ordinance, 1995 and the Haryana Municipal (Amendment) Act, 1995.

(2.) BEFORE we deal with the above mentioned questions, it would be useful to refer to the facts on which the parties are not in serious dispute. Petitioner, Sukhbir Singh, was elected as Municipal Commissioner of Municipal Committee, Gharaunda, in December, 1994. He was elected as Vice President of the Municipal Committee, Gharaunda, on 24. 2. 1995. On a requisition given by some of the members of the Municipal Committee,, Gharaunda, to the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal, under Section 21 of the act read with Rule 72-A of the Haryana Municipal Election Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), the Deputy Commissioner appointed the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Karnal, as the Presiding Officer for the meeting to be convened for consideration of "no Confidence Motion". The Sub Divisional Office (Civil) issued notices to all the 20 members of the Municipal Committee for the meeting to be held on 7. 3. 1996 at 3. 00 P. M. On the appointed day, 18 out of the 20 members of the Committee attended the meeting. These included 15 elected members and 3 nominated members. Ten members voted in favour of the "no- confidence motion" and 5 voted against it. Three nominated members did not cast their vote. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Karnal, made a declaration at the end of the meeting that the "no-confidence motion" stands passed against the petitioner. He accordingly recorded the proceedings of the meeting held on 7. 3. 1996. The petitioner has challenged the declaration made by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) on the ground that atleast 2/3rd of the members of the Committee are required to support the "no-confidence motion" before it can be treated as carried out and as only 10 members out of a total of 20 supported the motion of non-confidence, the same cannot be deemed to have been legally carried out.

(3.) THE Act of 1973 has been amended by the Haryana Legislature from time to time in order to bring it in tune with the 74th Constitution amendment. Section 2 (6) of the Act defines the 'committee' to mean a Municipal Committee or Municipal Council constituted or deemed to have been constituted by or under the Act. Section 2 (15-a) defines the term 'municipality'. It means an institution of self-government constituted under Section 2-A, which may be a Municipal Committee or a Municipal Council or a Municipal Corporation. Section 3 empowers the Government to declare any local area to be Municipality under the Act. Section 9 of the Act relates to composition of Municipalities. Section 21 deals with the "no-confidence motion"