R. Lalramthanga and anr. Vs. State of Mizoram and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- - the village council was functioning smoothly in the best interest of' the people. therefore, according to the learned counsel, termination of the membership of the writ petitioners without any opportunity being afforded to them to show cause is bad in law. 7. that apart, the learned assistant advocate general pointed out that the next election of the village council is scheduled to be held at any time within a period of two months next and, as such, the composition of the village council which is functioning efficiently may not be disturbed for this brief period. d. biswas, j. 1. this will petition has been preferred by 2 nominated members of the chaltlang village council. according to them, the said village council constituted under the lushai hills district (village council) act, 1953 consists of 8 members, out of which 6 are to be elected and 2 are to be nominated as per provision of section 3 (3) of the said act. the notification nominating the writ petitioners reads as follows :-- no. lad/vc-31/94(a), the 4th june, 1997. in continuation to this deptt's notification no. ladd/vc-31/94 dated 26-5-97 and in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (3) of section 3 of the lushai hills district (v/c) act, 1953, the governor of mizoram is pleased to nominate the persons whose names appeared in the enclosed annexurc to this notification as.....

Judgment:

D. Biswas, J. 1. This will petition has been preferred by 2 nominated members of the Chaltlang Village Council. According to them, the said Village Council constituted under the Lushai Hills District (Village Council) Act, 1953 consists of 8 members, out of which 6 are to be elected and 2 are to be nominated as per provision of Section 3 (3) of the said Act.

The notification nominating the writ petitioners reads as follows :--

No. LAD/VC-31/94(A), the 4th June, 1997. In continuation to this Deptt's Notification No. LADD/VC-31/94 dated 26-5-97 and in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (3) of Section 3 of the Lushai Hills District (V/C) Act, 1953, the Governor of Mizoram is pleased to nominate the persons whose names appeared in the enclosed annexurc to this Notification as members of village Councils within Aizawl District.

Denghnuna.

Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram.

Annexure to Order No. LAD/VC-31/94 dt. 4-6-97.LIST OF VILLAGE COUNCIL NOMINATED MEMBERS

AIZAWL DISTRICT.Sl. No.

Name of V/Cs.

Entitlement of nominated members

Name of proposed nominated member(s)1

2

3

4

...................

...................

31.

Chaltlang

1.   R. Lalramthanga.

2.   Vanlalnanga."

2. In pursuance of the aforesaid notification, the writ petitioners assumed office and

have been discharging their functions as members. The Village Council was functioning smoothly in the best interest of' the people. After installation of the new Government in the month of November. 1998, a notification was issued on 27-1-99 terminating the membership of the petitioners and appointing the respondent. Nos. 3 and 4 as members.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners that members nominated to the Village Council in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Act are to hold office during the pleasure of the Government. The tenure of office of the nominated members is coextensive with the tenure of the village Council. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, termination of the membership of the writ petitioners without any opportunity being afforded to them to show cause is bad in law. The learned Counsel further argued that the notification dated 27-1-99 is not informed by reason and, as such, the Court may declare the said notification dated 27-1-98 as unsustainable in law. Mr. Vaiphei, learned Assistant Advocate General relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in (1993) 2 SCC 242 : (AIR 1993 SC 1440) submitted that nominated members are to hold office during the pleasure of the Government and, as such, the State is absolutely free to withdraw the nomination at any time without any notice,

4. The simple question whether the State can recall its nominated members to the Village Council at any time before the expiry of the tenure of the office without giving an opportunity of being heard is to be answered in this writ petition.

5. The learned Counsel for the writ petitioners have relied upon the decisions in Dr. Rash Lal Yadav v. State of Dinar. (1994) 5 SCC 267 : (1994 AIR SCW 3329), Sri Jogen

Chandra Borah v. State of Assam, 1995 (3) GLT 265 and Anil Das v. State of Assam, 1998 (1) GLT 209. The factual of these cases are different from that at hand. In these cases the appointment of the Chairman of statutory boards and reconstitution of such boards were in controversy. In the instant writ petition we are concerned with the rights and status of the nominated members who, as per provisions of Section 6 (1) are to hold office during the pleasure of the Government. The Supreme Court dealt with this question in Om Narain Agarwal v. Nagar Palika, Shahjahanpur, (1993) 2 SCC 242 : (AIR 1993 SC 1440). According to the Supreme Court the right to seek election or to be elected or nominated to a statutory body depends and arises under a statute. In this case before the Supreme Court, the nomination of two women members were cancelled. The Supreme Court observed that the initial nomination of the two women depended on the pleasure and subjective satisfaction of the State Government. If such appointments made initially by nomination are based on political consideration, there can be no violation of any provision of the Constitution in case the legislature authorised the State Government to terminate such appointment at its pleasure and to nominate new members in their place. The nominated members, the Supreme Court held, do not have the will or authority of any residents of the Municipal Board behind them as may be present in the case of an elected member. In case of an elected member, the legislature has provided the grounds in Section 40 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 under which the members can be removed. But so far as the nominated members are concerned, the legislature in its wisdom has provided that they shall hold office during the pleasure of the Government. Such provision neither offends any article of the Constitution nor the same is against any public policy or democratic norms enshrined in the Constitution. There is also no question of any violation of principles of natural justice in not affording any opportunity to the nominated members before their removal nor the removal under the pleasure doctrine puts any stigma on the performance or character of the nominated members. It is done purely on political consideration.

6. Molding as above, the Supreme Court upheld the removal of the two women members and nomination of two women mem-

bers in their place. The factual matrix of the case at hand is almost similar. While in Section 6 (1) the legislature has incorporated the pleasure doctrine, in other parts of the Act it provided for removal of the President and Vice-President under certain circumstances. The office of the President and Vice-President are to be filled up by elected members of the Village Council only from amongst themselves by a majority of votes.> The provisions of law as a whole shows that the nomf nated members stand on a different footing and they hold office during the pleasure of the Government. Therefore, the ratio as is available in Om Narain Agarwal, (AIR 1993 SC 1440} (supra) squarely covers the case at hand. In my considered opinion, the impugned notification removing the writ petitioners from the Village Council cannot be interfered with.

7. That apart, the learned Assistant Advocate General pointed out that the next election of the Village Council is scheduled to be held at any time within a period of two months next and, as such, the composition of the Village Council which is functioning efficiently may not be disturbed for this brief period. This in my opinion is also an important factor to be considered while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. Any interference with the composition of the Village Council at this belated stage will unsettle the affairs of the Council and will not be in public interest.

8. In the result the writ petition is dismissed with no order as top costs.

.