SANJAY RAMDAS PATIL versus SANJAY AND OTHERS

Citation: [2021] 11 S.C.R. 640 · Decided: 01-09-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L. NAGESWARA RAO · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
640
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 11 S.C.R.
[2021] 11 S.C.R. 640
640
SANJAY RAMDAS PATIL
v.
SANJAY AND OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 5060 of 2021)
SEPTEMBER 01, 2021
[L. NAGESWARA RAO AND B. R. GAVAI, JJ.]
Municipal Corporations:
Maharashtra Municipal Corporations (Reservation of Offices
of Mayors) Rules, 2006 – r. 3(2) – Constitution of India – Art. 243T
– Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 – s. 19A –
Reservation of offices for the election of Mayor – Issuance of
Notification whereby Office of Mayor in Dhule Municipal
Corporation for the term commencing from June, 2021 reserved
for Backward Class category – Writ petition by respondent no.1
challenging the said Notification and sought direction to reserve
the post of Mayor of the said Corporation for the next term for
Scheduled Caste category – Notification set aside by the High Court
holding that since already on two earlier occasions, the Office of
Mayor of the said Corporation was reserved for Backward Class,
coupled with the fact that there has been no reservation for the
Scheduled Caste category, amounted to violation of rotation policy
– On appeal, held: Rules of 2006 are mechanism for giving effect
to the constitutional mandate u/Art. 243T of providing reservation
for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the enabling
provision for providing reservation for Backward Class of Citizens
in proportion to their population – Combined reading of the said
Rules along with the Art. 243T and s. 19(1A) would not permit the
interpretation as placed by the High Court – Taking into
consideration the fact that the number of seats reserved for
Scheduled Castes are 3 whereas for Backward Class are 7 i.e. more
than twice, it is quite probable that the post of Mayor could be
reserved for two earlier terms for Backward Class and whereas no
reservation is provided for Scheduled Castes – Dominant purpose
and the legislative intent of r. 3 is to provide reservation in proportion
of the population of such categories in the Municipal areas and
also to ensure that while all the eligible Corporations get reservation
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
641
at some point of time for the different categories, at the same time
there would be no repetition of reservation until the rotation is
complete – Legislative intent is to exclude the Corporations which
were earlier reserved for a particular category until all the
categories are provided reservation – However, while doing so, the
Court will have to interpret r. 3 in such a manner that this scheme is
made workable and not frustrated.
Interpretation of statutes: Cardinal principle of construction
of a statute – Held: Duty of the Court is to construe the Statute as a
whole – One provision of the Act is to be construed with reference
to other provisions so as to make a consistent enactment of the
whole Statute – Provisions which appear to be in conflict with each
other are to be constructed so as to harmonise them – While
interpreting a particular statutory provision, it should not result
into making the other provision a “dead letter” – Furthermore, the
court needs to ascertain the intention of the law-making authority
in the backdrop of dominant purpose and the intendment of the
Statute – Court will have to prefer an interpretation which makes
the Statute workable and gives effect to the intention of the
legislature than the one which defeats the purpose of the enactment.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Section 19 of the Maharashtra Municipal
Corporations Act, 1949 provides for election of Mayor and
Deputy Mayor from amongst the Councillors in the Corporation.
Sub-section (1A) of Section 19 of the Act provides that there
shall be reservation for the office of the Mayor in the Corporation,
by rotation, for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes,
Women and the Backward Class of Citizens, in the prescribed
manner. [Paras 13, 14][652-E, G-H]
1.2 Sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the Maharashtra Municipal
Corporations (Reservation of Offices of Mayors) Rules, 2006
provides that the Government shall, by notification in the Official
Gazette, specify the number of offices of Mayors in the Municipal
Corporations in the State to be reserved for the Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, Backward Class of Citizens and Women
(including the women belonging to the category of Backward Class
of Citizens). [Para 16][654-F-G]
SANJAY RAMDAS PATIL v. SANJAY AND OTHERS
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
642
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 11 S.C.R.
1.3 Clause (a) of sub-ru

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