Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2080 OF 2015
(Arising from S.L.P. (C) No. 26218/2014)
Sunil Haribhau Kale … Appellant (s)
Versus
Avinash Gulabrao Mardikar and others … Respondent (s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.:
Leave granted.
2. Election to the Amravati Municipal Corporation was held
on 16.02.2012. Of the total 87 Councillors, the Nationalist
Congress Party with 17, Muslim League with 2, R.P.I. with 1,
JUDGMENT
Samajwadi Party with 1 and 2 Independents formed an aghadi
(group) and elected the first respondent as their group leader
( Gat Neta ). On 06.03.2012, the 23 members submitted the
following application to the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati
for approval of the alliance and registration of the group leader:
“… The newly elected Corporators of the
Nationalist Congress Party Nos. 1 to 17 along with
other newly elected Corporators, totaling to 23, have
unanimously elected Shri Avinash Gulabrao Mardikar
as a Group Leader of the Nationalist Congress Party.
The List of the names of the Corporators from the
1
Page 1
Nationalist Congress Party, in Form – I, under Rule
31(1)(A) is submitted herewith. Similarly, the
affidavit duly signed by the honourable Corporators,
in Form – III, under Rule 4(1) is also annexed
herewith.
The strength of our Alliance is the Corporators
of the Nationalist Congress Party numbering 1 to 17
and that of 6 others, totaling to 23. Hence, it is
requested to kindly register and approve this Alliance
as a “Nationalist Congress Party Front. …”
(Emphasis supplied)
3. The affidavit filed by the members of the group, reads
as follows:
“…We, all the newly elected members of the
Amravati Municipal Corporation, Amravati, do hereby
inform you that, we have formed Nationalist
Congress Party Front; that we have the total strength
of 23 members; that we have unanimously elected
Shri Avinash Gulabrao Mardikar, the newly elected
member from Ward No.26(B), Benoda Ward as a
Group Leader of our Nationalist Congress Party Front;
that the said Group Leader Shri Avinash Gulabrao
Mardikar has hereby given his consent to work as a
Leader of our group; and that we do hereby further
undertake to bind ourselves to elect, vote and
support the members proposed and nominated by
our group leader Shri Avinash Gulabrao Mardikar as a
Mayor, Deputy Mayor, the President of the Standing
Committee, and the Members and the Chair Persons
of all the Committees; that we will not remain absent
at the time of the voting of the said election; and
that we are well aware of the fact that under the
provisions of Rule 3 of the Maharashtra Local
Authority Member Disqualification Act, it is binding
upon us to obey the orders that would be passed by
our group leader Shri Avinash Gulabrao Mardikar as
regards the proceedings of the assembly of the
Amravati Municipal Council, otherwise, the action can
be taken against us under the provision of Rule 3(5)
JUDGMENT
2
Page 2
of the said Act for the infringement of such orders.
…”
(Emphasis supplied)
4. The request was granted and, by order dated
11.04.2012, the group was recognized and the first respondent
was registered as the group leader.
5. Seeking a change of the leader, the General Secretary
of the Nationalist Congress Party, on 22.03.2014, addressed the
following letter to the Divisional Commissioner, relevant port of
which reads as follows:
“ Subject:- Nomination of the Group Leader of
the alliance of Nationalist Congress Party
in Amravati Municipal Corporation,
Amravati.
Res / Sir,
The Honourable Shri Bhashkarraoji Jadhao,
the President, Maharashtra Regional
Nationalist Congress Party has been
pleased to instruct that Shri Sunil Haribhau
Kale be nominated as a Group Leader of
the alliance of the Nationalist Congress
Party (NCP) in Amravati Municipal
Corporation, Amravati; and that the group
under his leadership only be approved of.
Hence, it is requested to take the
necessary action, accordingly.
JUDGMENT
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
Shivajirao Garje.
To,
The Divisional Commissioner,
Amravati Division, Amravati.”
3
Page 3
(Emphasis supplied)
6. The Divisional Commissioner, by order dated
16.06.2014, registered the appellant herein as the group leader
based on the letter of the Secretary of the Nationalist Congress
Party. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:
“… It appears that from the letter of Shri Shivajirao
Garje appointment of Shri Sunil Kale has been made
as Group Leader of the Party in Amravati Municipal
Corporation. There is a prevailing system of
appointing group leaders/parted on the elected
groups of all political parties by the political parties
themselves. Under these circumstances giving
approval to the appointment of Shri Sunil Kale on the
post of Group Leader appears to be correct.
Hence by way of rejecting the application of the
applicant Name of Shri Sunil Haribhau Kale is being
registered as Group Leader of Rashtravadi Congress
Party in Amravati Municipal Corporation. …”
(Emphasis supplied)
JUDGMENT
7. The first respondent challenged the order before the
High Court. By the impugned judgment dated 22.08.2014, the
High Court allowed the Writ Petition and quashed the order.
The High Court took the view that the General Secretary of one
of the political parties forming the aghadi (group), was not
competent to make a request to the Divisional Commissioner to
register change of the group leader and that the Divisional
4
Page 4
Commissioner acted wholly without jurisdiction in registering
the change as requested by one of the political parties.
8. Aggrieved, the appeal.
9. Heard the learned counsels appearing on both sides.
10. Section 2(a) defining “ aghadi ”, Section 2(i) defining
“municipal party” and Section 2(j) defining “original political
party”, of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members’
Disqualification Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’)
read as follows:
“2(a) “ aghadi ” or “front” means a group of persons
who have formed themselves into a party for
the purpose of setting up candidates for
election to a local authority;”
xxx xxx xxx
“2(i) “municipal party”, in relation to the
councillor belonging to any political party or
aghadi or front in accordance with the
Explanation to Section 3, means, —
(i) in the case of a councillor of a Municipal
Corporation, the group consisting of all
councillors of the Municipal Corporation for the
time being belonging to that political party or
aghadi or front in accordance with the said
Explanation ;
(ii) in the case of a councillor of a Municipal
Council, the group consisting of all the
councillors of the Municipal Council for the time
being belonging to that political party or aghadi
or front in accordance with the said
Explanation ;”
JUDGMENT
5
Page 5
“2(j) “original political party”, in relation to a
councillor or a member, means the political
party to which he belongs for the purposes of
sub-section (1) of section 3;”
(Emphasis supplied)
11. Rule 2(b-1) of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members
Disqualification Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
Rules’) defines a ‘leader to a municipal party (group leader/ Gat
Neta ), relevant portion of which reads as follows:
“2(b) “Form” means the form appended to these
rules;
[b-1](i) “Leader in relation to a municipal party”
means a Councillor chosen by each political party, or
aghadi or front in the Municipal Corporation or as the
case may be in the Municipal Council as its leader
and includes any other Councillor of such party or
aghadi or front authorized by it to act in the absence
of the leader as, or discharge the functions of the
leader of such party or aghadi or front for the
purposes of these rules. ”
(Emphasis supplied)
JUDGMENT
12. The definition of the term ‘leader’ very clearly shows
that where a municipal party is an aghadi , its leader has to be
chosen by the aghadi or front. Necessarily, any change in the
leader of the municipal party is to be effected by the aghadi
and not by any outsider. Once the Rules provide for the
election of the group leader, it has to be done in that manner
only and not in any other manner, even when there is change
of the leader. The change of leader has to be in the same
6
Page 6
democratic process of induction, in the absence of any other
method prescribed under the Rules concerned.
13. Once an aghadi (group) is formed and duly recognized
by the Divisional Commissioner, it becomes a municipal party
in terms of Section 2(i) of the Act. Once original political parties
form a municipal party by way of an aghadi , for all purposes,
the group leader is chosen by the municipal party ( aghadi )
only. Rules do not provide for nomination of group leader.
Similarly, the group leader of the aghadi can be changed only
by the group and not by one of the political parties, big or
small, belonging to the aghadi . In a democracy, a leader is not
imposed; leader is elected. Once the birth of a leader in a group
is by way of election by the group, the group leader thus
elected cannot be replaced otherwise than through the very
JUDGMENT
same process of the election in the group, in the absence of
any rules to the contra . No doubt, the Nationalist Congress
Party has 17 members in the aghadi (group). That does not
mean that the said party can impose a group leader in the
aghadi . Imposition of a group leader otherwise than by the
democratic process cuts at the roots of the democracy and
certainly it is in violation of the Rules. It is always open to the
original political parties to have their respective leaders in the
7
Page 7
aghadi . However, as far as group leader is concerned, he has to
be elected by the aghadi (group).
14. Thus, although for a few other different reasons as well,
apart from those sounded by the High Court in the impugned
order, we agree with the view taken by the High Court. The
appeal hence is dismissed. The interim order dated 05.09.2014
is vacated.
15. There shall be no order as to costs.
..…….…..…………J.
(M.Y. EQBAL)
..……………………J.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
New Delhi;
February 20, 2015.
JUDGMENT
8
Page 8
ITEM NO.50 COURT NO.11 SECTION IX
[for judgment]
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
26218/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated
22/08/2014 in WP No. 2772/2014 passed by the High Court Of
Bombay)
SUNIL HARIBHAU KALE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
AVINASH GULABRAO MARDIKAR AND ORS Respondent(s)
Date : 20/02/2015 This petition was called on for judgment
today.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kishor Lambat, Adv.
Mr. Milind Vashanav, Adv. for
M/s. Lambat & Associates
For Respondent(s) Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee,Adv.
Mr. Charudatta Mahindrakar, Adv.
Mr. A.S. Raja, Adv.
Mr. Suhas Kadam, Adv. for
M/s Lemax Lawyers & Co.
JUDGMENT
Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv.
Ms. Anagha S. Desai, Adv.
Mr. Akash Kakade, Adv.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph pronounced
the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice
M.Y. Eqbal and His Lordship.
Leave granted.
Appeal is dismissed in terms of signed
reportable judgment. No costs.
(INDU POKHRIYAL) (PARDEEP KUMAR)
COURT MASTER AR-cum-PS
[SIGNED REPORTABLE JUDGMENT IS PLACED ON THE FILE]
9
Page 9
JUDGMENT
1
Page 10