- (1.) SHRI Vipin Kumar Agarwal has filed this writ petition chal lenging the nomination of opposite party Nos. 5, 6 and 7 as nominated members to the Municipal Board, Puwayan District Shahjahanpur.
(2.) SHRI Ravi Kiran Jain assisted by SHRI Laksmi Kant Davey has been heard at considerable length. SHRI S. G. Hasnain, learned Additional Chief Standing Coun sel has accepted notice for the respon dents State of U. P. and other State offi cials. Three points have been argued by Shri Jain. First, that the respondents nomination is contrary to the provisions contained in Section 9 (1) (d ). Second, that the State Government has flouted the Government Order Annexure-1 which re lated to the requirement of qualifications which a nominated person was supposed to possess. Three, the petitioner himself made an application for being nominated which has been rejected by the order dated 1-12- 1997 on the ground that the matter was only meant for nomination and since the District Magistrate had not been asked to forward any such name by the Govern ment to such forwarding of the name was possible as was prayed by the petitioner. In so far as the first point is con cerned it may be noted that Section 9 (1) (d) reads as follows : S. 9. Composition of municipality - (1) A municipality shall consist of a President, who shall be its Chairperson and - (a ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (d) nominated members, who shall be nominated by the State Government, by notification in the official Gazette, from amongst persons having special knowledge or experience in municipal administration and whose numbers shall in the case of - (i) Nagar Panchayat, be not less than two and not more than three. (ii) Municipal Council, be not less than three and not more than five; (e ). Proviso-1. Provided that the persons referred to in clause (d) shall not have the right to vote in the meetings of the municipality. Provixo-2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(3.) THE arguments of Shri Jain was that since the provision quoted above re1-quired the State Government to nominate members "from amongst persons having special knowledge or experience in Municipal administration" the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 should not have been nominated for the simple reasons they neither have special knowledge nor ex perience in municipal administration. The primary question which arises for consideration is whether when the Legislature itself has provided that the nomination can be made by the State Government even on the basis of finding a member to be having "special knowledge", how much of that matter is open to judicial scrutiny or the extent of justice ability of that knowledge which the Government has power to make the basis for nomina tions.;