JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letter no.52 dated 20th January, 2020 issued under the signature of the Secretary,
State Election Commission, Jharkhand in purported exercise of power
conferred under rule 112(1) of the Jharkhand Nagar Palika Nirwachan
Evam Chunao Yachika Niyamawali, 2012 (hereinafter to the referred
as 'the Rules, 2012'), whereby the petitioner has been directed to
appear before the State Election Commissioner, Jharkhand for hearing
on the complaint lodged against him.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been elected as Mayor of Giridih Municipal Corporation in the year 2018. The
respondent no.2 issued the impugned letter dated 20th January, 2020
to the petitioner, informing inter alia that a complaint was lodged
against him by some organization with a direction on him to remain
present on the date of hearing of the complaint with supporting
evidence and documents. The aforesaid impugned letter has been
assailed on the ground that the respondent no.2 has no jurisdiction to
entertain any complaint challenging the election of the petitioner as
Mayor of Giridih Municipal Corporation. It is further submitted that
earlier in view of the provisions enshrined in Section 18 of the
Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the
Act, 2011') the power to entertain the complaint was with the
respondent no.2, but now by virtue of amendment carried out in sub-
section (2) of Section 18 of the Act, 2011 by Jharkhand Municipal
(Amendment) Act, 2017 (Jharkhand Act No.01 of 2018)], the power to
entertain a complaint for setting aside the election of a member of
municipal body has been taken away from the respondent no.2 and
such power has been conferred to the concerned department. As per
the said amendment, the role of the respondent no.2 is merely
advisory in nature. Thus, pursuant to the said amendment, the
respondent no.2 has no jurisdiction to issue such notice to the
petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not suppressed
any fact at the time of contesting the election for the post of Mayor of
Giridih Municipal Corporation. He belongs to scheduled castes category
and is a permanent resident of Jharkhand and in this regard a
residential certificate has also been issued to him. It is, however,
submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue with
regard to issuance of caste certificate to the petitioner is subjudiced
before this Court in W.P.(C) No.3734 of 2019. The election of any
returned candidate, who is elected by the mandate of people cannot
be questioned save and except by way of filing election petition under
rule 116 of the Rules, 2012. As such, the issuance of the impugned
notice dated 20th January, 2020 by the respondent no.2 is not only
arbitrary but the same is also without jurisdiction and a glaring
example of colourable exercise of power.
(3.) On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that the power conferred under Section 18 of the Act, 2011 to the
department and the power conferred under rule 112 of the Rules, 2012
to the respondent no.2 are different and distinct which operate
completely in different fields. There is no inconsistency between both
the aforesaid provisions and as such mere amendment carried out in
sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Act, 2011 does not invalidate the
power of the respondent no.2 under rule 112 of the Rules, 2012. It is
also submitted that the petitioner has sufficient opportunity to defend
himself before the respondent no.2 and as such the present writ
petition is not maintainable.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.