HEMANT NARAYAN RASNE versus THE COMMISSIONER AND ADMINISTRATOR OF PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

Citation: [2022] 18 S.C.R. 180 · Decided: 19-10-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DINESH MAHESHWARI · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
180
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 18 S.C.R.
HEMANT NARAYAN RASNE
v.
THE COMMISSIONER AND ADMINISTRATOR OF PUNE
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 7685 of 2022)
OCTOBER 19, 2022
[DINESH MAHESHWARI AND J.K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949: ss. 6, 6A,
20, 452A; Constitution of India, Art.243U – Corporation election –
Continuance of Standing Committee – When the term of Pune
Municipal Corporation (PMC) came to an end – State government
on being informed that it was not  possible to conduct general
elections for constitution of the new Corporation, appointed an
administrator – Appellant, Chairman of the Standing Committee of
PMC filed a writ petition before High Court on the ground that the
Standing Committee shall remain in existence until constitution of
new Standing Committee, irrespective of appointment of the
administrator – High Court dismissing writ petition held that once
a Councillor ceases to be Councillor, the Standing Committee would
not still exist and continue to function as such and it was the
Administrator, who was appointed, who would exercise the powers
and functions of the Corporation – Challenge against – Held:  When
no person could be said to be holding the office of the Councillor
after completion of the term in view of the mandate of ss.6 and 6A
of the Act of 1949, it follows as a necessary corollary that the
Standing Committee stood dissolved along with the completion of
the term of the Corporation –  The proviso to sub-section (3) of s.20
cannot be read to mean that notwithstanding the expiration of the
duration of a Corporation and thereby, termination of the term of
office of the Councillors, there could still be any Standing Committee
in existence –  Sub-sections (1A) and (1B) of s.452A of the Act,
which are operating in the instant case, deal with a specific peculiar
contingency where general elections could not be held during the
time specified by the enactment even after the expiry of the term of
the Corporation, essentially due to COVID-19 pandemic situation
– Appointment of Administrator in such a contingency does not and
   [2022] 18 S.C.R. 180
180
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
181
cannot override the mandate of Art.243U of the Constitution of
India as also the provisions of ss.6 and 6A of the Act as regards the
tenure – End of the tenure of Corporation has its consequential
effect of the end of the term of the office of the Councillor; and
when no person including the present appellant could be said to be
holding the office of Councillor after end of the term of the
Corporation, existence of any Standing Committee thereafter, is
simply out of question – Any other interpretation shall be standing
at conflict with the mandate of Art.243U of the Constitution of India
and ss.6 and 6A of the Act of 1949.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Whether the Standing Committee could be said
to be a continuing Committee even after the term of the
Corporation has come to an end and thereby, the term of the
office of its members, i.e., the Councillors has also ended. The
answer could only be in the negative. [Para 12][196-F]
1.2 When no person could be said to be holding the office
of the Councillor after completion of the term in view of the
mandate of Sections 6 and 6A of the Act of 1949, it follows as a
necessary corollary that the Standing Committee stands dissolved
along with the completion of the term of the Corporation. The
proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the Act of 1949
essentially comes in operation only in the eventuality when there
are existing members of the Standing Committee in office when
general elections are held and they are to retire on the election
of a new Committee, i.e., at the first meeting of the Corporation
after general elections. The proviso cannot be read to mean that
notwithstanding the expiration of the duration of a corporation
and thereby, termination of the term of office of the Councillors,
there could still be any Standing Committee in existence. It gets
perforce iterated that the Standing Committee stands dissolved
along with the completion of the term of the Corporation. [Para
13 & 14][197-B-E]
1.3 The provision of Section 452 essentially operates in
relation to the contingency where the State Government takes
the steps for dissolution of the existing Corporation after
HEMANT NARAYAN RASNE v. COMMNR. &
ADMINISTRATOR OF PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPN.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
182
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 18 S.C.R.
oppor

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