WAMAN SHIVRAM MAHADIK Vs. M.W. DESAI
LAWS(BOM)-1973-2-11
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on
February 13,1973
Waman Shivram Mahadik
Appellant
VERSUS
M.W. Desai
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. BOMBAY TRUST CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]SEAFORD COURT ESTATES LTD. V. ASHER [REFERRED TO]
DATTATRAYA V. S.V. BHAVE [REFERRED TO]
ST. AUBYN V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL [REFERRED TO]
RAO SHIV BAHADUR SINGH VS. STATE OF VINDHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. RAO MANOHAR SINGHJI [REFERRED TO]
JAMUNA PRASAD MUKHARIYA VS. LACHHI RAM [REFERRED TO]
SAGHIR AHMAD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SAKHAWANT ALL VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
BENGAL IMMUNITY COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
KANAIYALAL CHANDULAL MONIM VS. INDUMATI T POTDAR [REFERRED TO]
RAM KRISHNA DALMIA SHRIYANS PRASAD JAIN JAI DAYAL DALMIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HATHISING MANUFACTURING CO LIMITED AHMEDABAD D P R CASSAD DIGVIJAYSINHJI SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS LIMITED JAMNAGAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BOARD OF THISTEES AYURVEDIC AND UNANI TIBIA COLLEGE DELHI VS. STATE OF DELHI NOW DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
WEST RAMNAD ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
NAROTTAMDAS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. BAI VINA [REFERRED TO]
BISHNU CHARAN MUKHERJEE VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
MADHYA PRADESH TRANSPORT CO PVT VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
RAMJIBHAI VIRPAL SHAH VS. GORDHANDAS MAGANLAL BHAGAT [REFERRED TO]
CHIPPING AND PAINTING EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION PRIVATE LIMITED VS. A T ZAMBRE [REFERRED TO]
MILAKHRAJ VS. JAGDISH CHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
J.L. Nain, J. -
(1.)This is a petition filed by one Waman Shivram Mahadik a sitting Councillor of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (hereinafter referred to as "the Municipal Corporation"). He prays that an appropriate Write, order or direction be issued by this Court striking down section 2 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation (Second Amendment) Act, 1972 being Maharashtra Act IV of 1973 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "the Amendment Act") as invalid and ultra vires the Constitution of India. Respondent No. 1 is the Municipal Commissioner. Respondent No. 2 is the Municipal Corporation. As the vires of a provision in a State Act was being impugned, I had issued notice to the Advocate General of Maharashtra under the provisions of order XXVIIA, Civil Procedure Code. Thereafter the State of Maharashtra applied to be joined as party respondents and by my order dated Feb. 5, 1973 they were ordered to be added as and are now respondents No. 3.
(2.)It appears that the Municipal Corporation is not only the owner of large areas of unbuilt land in Greater Bombay, but is also a landlord in respect of a large number of constructed tenements. It owns about 56 colonies containing approximately 40,000 hutments and about 2316 buildings containing about 37,000 tenements. It has also let out over 6000 plots of land According to the petitioner the Municipal Corporation owns a much larger number of hutments, tenements and plots. But it will be sufficient for the purpose of this petition to state that the Municipal Corporation is a landlord in the City of Bombay in a large way.
(3.)The Municipal Corporation is constituted under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, III of 1888 (hereinafter referred to as "the Municipal Act") which has been amended from time to time. Sec. 3 (c) defines a "Councillor" as a person who is duly elected as a member of the Corporation under the Municipal Act. Under section 14 a person who is enrolled as a voter is qualified to be elected as a Councillor. Sec. 19 (1) (b) provides that the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly roll for the time being in force in respect of Greater Bombay shall be the roll of voters for the purpose of municipal elections in Greater Bombay. Sec. 17 provides that on incurring a disqualification under section 16 a Councillor shall cease to be a Councillor.
(2.)It appears that the Municipal Corporation is not only the owner of large areas of unbuilt land in Greater Bombay, but is also a landlord in respect of a large number of constructed tenements. It owns about 56 colonies containing approximately 40,000 hutments and about 2316 buildings containing about 37,000 tenements. It has also let out over 6000 plots of land According to the petitioner the Municipal Corporation owns a much larger number of hutments, tenements and plots. But it will be sufficient for the purpose of this petition to state that the Municipal Corporation is a landlord in the City of Bombay in a large way.
(3.)The Municipal Corporation is constituted under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, III of 1888 (hereinafter referred to as "the Municipal Act") which has been amended from time to time. Sec. 3 (c) defines a "Councillor" as a person who is duly elected as a member of the Corporation under the Municipal Act. Under section 14 a person who is enrolled as a voter is qualified to be elected as a Councillor. Sec. 19 (1) (b) provides that the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly roll for the time being in force in respect of Greater Bombay shall be the roll of voters for the purpose of municipal elections in Greater Bombay. Sec. 17 provides that on incurring a disqualification under section 16 a Councillor shall cease to be a Councillor.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.