JEEVAN CHANDRABHAN IDNANI & ANR. versus DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, KONKAN BHAVAN & ORS.

Citation: [2012] 3 S.C.R. 32 · Decided: 31-01-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ALTAMAS KABIR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2012] 3 S.C.R: 32 
JEEVAN CHANDRABHAN IDNANI & ANR. 
v. 
DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, KONKAN BHAVAN & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1192 of 2012) 
JANUARY 31, 2012 
[ALTAMAS KABIR, SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND 
J. CHELAMESWAR, JJ.] 
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 -
C s.31-A(2), second proviso - Interpretation and purport of -
Election to Municipal Corporation - Formation of post electoral 
aghadis or fronts - Held: The second proviso to sub-section 
(2) of s.31A enables the formation of a Aghadi or front within 
a period of one month from the date of notification of the 
D election results -
To permit recognition of variations in the 
relative strength of the political parties beyond the mentioned 
period of one month would be plainly in violation of the 
language of the second proviso to s.31A - Such an Aghadi 
or front can be formed by various possible combinations of 
E councillors belonging to either two or more registered parties 
or recognised parties or independent councillors -
The 
component parties or individual independent Councillors, as 
the case may be, in the case of a given frontlaghadi do not 
lose their political identity and merge in to the aghadilfront or 
F 
bring into existence a new political party - On formation of 
such an Aghadi or front, the same is required to be registered 
- Once such an Aghadi is registered by a legal fiction created 
under the proviso, such an Aghadi is treated as if it were a 
pre-poll Aghadi or front -
Maharashtra Local Authority 
G Members Disqualification Act, 1986 - ss.2(a), 3(2) and 5 -
Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification 
Rules, 1987. 
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 -
H 
32 
JEEVAN CHANDRABHAN IDNANI v. DIVISIONAL 
33 
COMMNR., KONKAN BHAVAN 
s.31A -
Expressions 'political party', 'registered party', 
A 
'recognised party', 'groups' and 'front or aghadi' - Meaning of 
-
Discussed -
Maharashtra Local Authority Members 
Disqualification Act, 1986 - s.2(a) - Representation of the 
People Act, 1951 - Election Symbols (Reservation and 
Allotment) Order, 1968. 
B 
Administrative Law - Subordinate legislation - Held: 
Subordinate legislation made by the executive in exercise of 
the powers delegated by the legislature, at best, may reflect 
the understanding of the executive of the scope of the powers C 
delegated - But there is no inherent guarantee such an 
understanding is consistent with the true meaning and purport 
of the parent enactment. 
Election to the third respondent-
Municipal 
Corporation (in the State of Maharashtra) took place and 
D 
the Corporation was duly constituted with 76 elected 
Councillors. Apart from fourteen Members elected as 
Councillors to the Municipal Corporation on behalf of the 
Lok Bharti Party, two more Councillors, one independent 
and the other a lone Councillor, belonging to the 
E 
Republican Party of India (G), joined hands with the 
Councillors of the Lok Bharti Party and formed a front/ 
aghadi immediately after the election availing the facility 
provided under the 2nd proviso to Section 31A(2) of the 
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. 
F 
Respondent Nos. 6 to 13 were members of the said 
Aghadi. However, they decided to quit the Aghadi and 
form a 'Swatantar Aghadi' and addressed a letter to the 
first respondent requesting it to make suitable changes 
in the records maintained under the Maharashtra Local 
G 
Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986 and the 
rules made thereunder. The first respondent accepted 
the request by a written communication. 
Challenging the said written communication, two 
H 
34 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012) 3 S.C.R. 
A Councillors belonging to the Lok Bharti Party filed writ 
petition before the High Court. They contended that in 
the light of the language of the second proviso to 
Section 31A(2) of the said Municipal Corporation Act, 
formation of a front or aghadi after the completion of the 
B election process to the municipal body is permissible only 
when that is done within one month from the date of the 
notification of the results of the election while the 
impugned written communication purported to recognise 
an aghadilfront beyond the above-mentioned period of 
c one month which was clearly impermissible and hence 
illegal. The High Court held that the appointment of 
Councillors to the four categories of Committees 
specified under Section 31A(1) of the Act takes place "at 
least more than once" during the tenure o

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