VISHWANATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an applicaion by Vishwanath and Mahavir Prasad under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ, direction or order in the nature of quo warranto. The State of Rajasthan, the Secretary to the Government Local Self-Government Department, and Director of Local Bodies have been made parties to it along with Sheo Bhagwan and Chuniram whose membership of the Municipal Board of Bhadra (hereinafter called the Board) in district Ganganagar is being challenged.

(2.) THE applicants' case is this. Elections to the Board took place in April 1955, and the applicants as well as Sheo Bhagwan were elected. Later in June, 1955, Chuniram was nominated a member of the Board by Government. THE names of the members of the Board were duly published. In July, 1955, election to the office of the chairman of the Board was held, and one Jhamanlal was duly elected as chairman. THEre was an election petition with respect to this election of the chairman, and therefore the Government did not publish the name of the chairman in the gazette till the 20th of March, 1956; but the fact of the election of the chairman was well-known and meetings of the Board were duly held from August, 1955. THEse meetings were attended by the members including Sheo Bhagwan and Chuniram, and these two did not raise any objection to the validity of the election of the chairman. Later Sheo Bhagwan absented himself from the meetings of the Board from 22nd of October, 1955 to 2nd of March, 1956, without any leave being sanctioned by the Board. Consequently he became disqualified under Section 12 (3) (c) of the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act (No. XXIII) of 1951 (hereinafter called the Act) from continuing as a member of the Board. THE Chairman thereupon asked the Director of Local Bodies to pass orders declaring the seat vacant. Chuniram also absented himself from the meetings of the Board in December, 1955, and January, February and March, 1956, without taking any leave from the Board, and therefore he also became disqualified under Section 12 (3) (c) of the Act from continuing to be a member. THE Chairman wrote this time to the Secretary Local Self-Government, and requested that his seat might also be declared vacant. THE Chairman was however informed by the Government that his own election as chairman had not been published in the gazette till the 20th of March 1956, and as such the meetings held before that date were null and void, and therefore Sheo Bhagwan and Chuniram's seats in the Board could not be declared vacant. THE Chairman, however, did not accept this interpretation of the Government, and requested them to review their order. THEreupon, the Chairman was informed on the 5th of July, 1956, that the Chairman was wrong in stopping Sheo Bhagwan and Chuniram from functioning as members of the Board. THE Chairman was also asked to explain his conduct. THEreafter, the present petition was made in this Court on the 12th of July, 1956. THE contention of the applicants is that the publication of the name of the Chairman in the gazette as required by Section 22, Sub-section (14) of the Act is merely directory, and that the Chairman had a right to function immediately after his election, and that Rule 13 of thp Rules framed by Government for election of Chairman and for the matter of that of Vice Chairman also (hereinafter called the Rules) goes far beyond Section 22 (14) of the Act, and therefore is ultra vires of the rule making powers. Consequently, it is urged that the meetings of the Board held by the Chairman after his election could not be null and void, and Sheo Bhagwan and Chuniram incurred disqualification under Section 12 (3) (c) of the Act as they did not attend for four consecutive months. THE application has been opposed by Sheo Bhagwan and Chuniram.