BALDEV SINGH GANDHI versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS .

Citation: [2002] 1 S.C.R. 1021 · Decided: 14-02-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

BALDEV SINGH GANDHI 
A 
v. 
... .. 
ST A TE OF PUNJAB AND ORS . 
FEBRUARY 14, 2002 
[V.N. KHARE AND ASHOK BHAN, JJ.] 
B 
Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 : 
~ 
Section /6{/}(e)--Removal of member on ground of 'Misconduct'-
Interpretaiion of-Elected Councillor criticised house tax assessment list c 
• 
prepared by the Municipal Council-State Government alleged that his acts 
caused loss of revenue and removed him from office-Held, since freedom of 
speech and expression includes fair criticism of law or any executive action, 
charges of misconduct levelled against him does not fall within the ambit of 
Section 16(/)(e)-Constitution of India, 1950, Article 19(/)(a). 
D 
Words and Phrases : 
~ 
• 
'Misconduct'. -Meaning of in the context of the Punjab Municipal Act, 
1911. 
Respondent-Municipal Council prepared and finalised the house tax E 
assessment list for all buildings within its limit. Appellant-elected Municipal 
Councillor criticised the house tax assessment list and asked the tax payer to 
come to him for sorting out the grievances. He filed a petition before the High 
Court and protested the house tax assessment list through pamphlets and 
loudspeakers. State Government alleged that due to the acts attributed to the F 
r 
appellant there was difficulty in realisation of house tax which caused loss in 
the revenue to the Council an~ removed appellant from the office of the 
Council under Section 16(l)(e) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. Aggrieved, 
appellant filed a writ petition which was dismissed. Hence the present appeal. 
The questions involved in this appeal are whether the charges levelled G 
against the appellant fall within the ambit of Section 16(1)(e) of the Act; acts 
-, 
attributed to him have any nexus with the financial loss alleged to be suffered 
... 
by the Council; and also whether the findings recorded by the State 
Governme;1t while removing the appellant from the office of the Council are 
outside the scope of the charges levelled against the appellant. 
H 
1021 
1022 
SUPREME CUI ;RT REPORTS 
~2002] I S.C.R. 
A 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. Every citizen, inasmuch as a Municipal Councillor, has a 
., -
freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(l)(a) of the Constitution 
which includes fair criticism of the law or any executive action. Freedom of 
B 
speech and expression is guaranteed m our democratic republic both in 
legislature as well as in local bodies and, therefore, a legislator or a municipal 
councillor legitimately can express his views in regard to what he thinks to 
be in public interest. A legitimate exercise of right of speech and expression 
including a fair criticism is not to be throttled and also such right could not 
be infringed on the ground of remote or speculative ground, otherwise all the 
"" 
c guaranteed liberties under the Constitution are liable to be infringed on one 
excuse or the other. [1027-C-D; 1028-F-Gj 
.. 
1.2. In the instant case, appellant as an elected representative of the 
Ward owned duty not merely to his Municipal Council but held his office in 
trust for the public and was expected to exercise his functions in the interest 
D of the public. The criticism of the house tax assessment list was in furtherance 
of what he believed to be in public interest. Keeping in view the aim, object 
and the scheme behind the provisions of the Act and also in the context the 
., 
expression 'misconduct' has been used, such a criticism by the appellant of 
• 
the house tax assessment list prepared and finalised by the Council did not 
E 
constitute 'misconduct' within the meaning of the expression 'misconduct' 
occurring in Section 16(1)(e) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. [ 1028-C-E[ 
Terminiello Chicago (1948) 337 US 1 and American Communications 
Association v. Douds, (1949) 339 US 382, referred to. 
F 
Hamlyn Lecture on Freedom of Mind and Comcience, Freedom under the 
Law by Sir Alfred Denning L.J at p. 35, referred to. 
' 
1.3. The connection between the legislation and object of legislation must 
be real and proximate and not far-fetched. Thus the act attributed to the 
appellant must have direct and real connection with the alleged loss in revenue 
G suffered by the municipal council. In the instant case, appellant did not incite 
tax payers not to pay taxes or incited people to resort to violence against house 
tax assessment list. A fair criticism of the house tax assessment list by the 
appellant has no bearing on the alleged loss

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.