Shri Pawan Sharma vs The State of Meghalaya and Others

This petition has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation with the submissions that the Municipal Elections were not being held in the State of

Meghalaya inspite of the order of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.41 of 1999, passed way back on 10.12.1999, whereby such

elections were required to be held within six months of the order.

In response to this petition, an affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the State Government stating, inter alia, that after order of the

Supreme Court, the Government did make attempts to hold the Municipal Elections and in fact, the date of polling was fixed on 25.11.2000 but

only one nomination was filed, that too was subsequently withdrawn; and hence, the elections could not be held. It is also stated that such want of

participation in the elections had its basis in the resistance by the traditional tribal institutions and social organisations; and that in order to bring

greater accord in the society, the Government constituted two Working Group Committees in the years 2006 and 2008. A report of one such

working group has also been placed for perusal before us.

It has, however, been submitted that in view of the mandate of Article 243-ZC of the Constitution of India, Municipal Elections cannot be held

in the tribal areas and efforts are being made to carry out the amendments to the Meghalaya Municipal Act, 1973 [''the Act of 1973''] after the

constitutional 74th amendment, so as to bring the Act of 1973 in conformity with the constitutional provisions. It has also been stated that Urban

Affairs Department of the Government would take steps for amendment of the Act of 1973 and to notify the areas so that the Municipal Elections

could be held as per the law. It is, inter alia, stated in the affidavit-in-opposition that,-

That in respect of para 21,22,23 and 24 of the PIL petition, the respondent has no comments to make as such.

However, it may be reiterated that in terms of the Hon''ble Supreme Court''s dated 10.12.1999 which observed ""that the municipal election may

now be held within 6 months, in accordance with law."" In compliance to the aforesaid order passed by the Hon''ble Supreme Court the State

Government fixed 25.11.2000 for holding election of Shillong Municipality. But the traditional tribal institutions and social organisations boycotted

the election and made a public appeal in this regard not to participate in election. As a result no nomination except one was filed which also

afterwards withdrawn. Due to non-participation in the election process and to bring greater accord amongst society, the State Government

constituted two Working Group Committees one in the year 2006 and the other in 2008 with the intention of engaging more public participation in

municipal administration in order to hold municipal election as per law at the earliest but no fruitful result emerged.

That the respondent further states that the matter now has been discussed with Advocate General seeking his legal opinion with regard to

existing Meghalaya Municipal Act, 1973 and Constitutional 74th Amendment, so that election can be held at the earliest. The Department after

taking the opinion also could realise that as per the Constitutional provision under Article 243ZC, municipal election cannot be held in tribal area as

per specific exclusion of the tribal area. After getting the opinion of the Advocate General, the Meghalaya Urban Affairs Department came to

know that amendments have to be made in the Meghalaya Municipal Act, 1973 after Constitutional 74th Amendment came into force w.e.f.

1.6.1993 in order to make the Meghalaya Municipal Act, 1973 in conformity with the Constitutional provision. Now to hold the election, the

Urban Affairs Department shall immediately amend the Meghalaya Municipal Act, 1973 and notify the area as per Constitutional provision so that

municipal election can be held as per law for Shillong Municipality. The Urban Affairs Department shall immediately make all the necessary

amendments and notify the area in conformity with the Constitutional provision and go ahead with preparation of draft roll, to hold municipal

election as per law.

Learned counsel for the petitioner today frankly submits that the submissions as made on behalf of the Government stand in conformity with the

law and that efforts are indeed being made to hold the Municipal Elections in accordance with law but submits further that the necessary steps

should now be taken on priority basis as the matter of holding such elections has remained pending for excessive length of time.

Though the time elapsed in this matter appears to be excessive however, it is noticed that at the initial stage, the State Government did make

efforts to hold the elections but the actual process did not materialise for the reasons over which, the Government might not be carrying total

control.

Be that as it may, in the totality of the circumstances of this case, and particularly looking to the submissions made in the affidavit, we are

satisfied that the State Government had been carrying out its responsibilities as regards holding of Municipal Elections but the same could only be

held in accordance with the constitutional mandate and in that regard, the process of proper modification of the provisions of the Act of 1973

appears unavoidable.

Taking note of the submissions made on behalf of the State Government, we find no reason to continue with this PIL any further and are inclined

to dispose it of but with the observations that the efforts must be made to carry out all the necessary processes with utmost expedition and in

priority. With the observations foregoing, this petition stands disposed of.