High CourtsSingle Bench(1998) 03 KAR CK 0043

Smt. B. Kamala vs The Director of Municipal Administration, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore and Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 25 March 1998 · Citation: (1998) 4 KarLJ 106

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chandrashekaraiah, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 5099 of 1998

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

36 paragraphs · 909 words
1.

The Municipal Council, Hospet consists of 36 members which includes the local M.L.A. Some of the members of the Municipal Council moved a motion of ''No Confidence'' against the petitioner who is the President of the Town Municipal Council, Hospet. The said motion was placed before the Town Municipal Council for consideration on 31-01-1998. In the meeting of the Municipal Council 24 members voted in favour of the motion and 12 members voted against the motion. This resolution has been challenged in this Writ Petition.

2.

Sri Kallemulla Sheriff, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the M.L.A. who is a member of the Municipal Council tinder Section 11(1)(c) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act is to be excluded for the purpose of calculating 2/3rds of the total number of members as provided u/s 42(9) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as Act) and if he is excluded then the resolution is not carried by 2/3rds of the total number of members and consequently the petitioner is entitled to continue in office as President of the Town Municipal Council. In reply to the said submission, Sri Patil, learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that under the Act, there is no bar for an M.L.A. to participate in the meeting called for consideration of the motion of ''No Confidence'' as he being a member of the Municipal Council is entitled to participate and therefore his participation is to be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the 2/3rds of the total number of members as provided u/s 42(9) of the Act.

3.

On these rival contentions, the question that arises for consideration is whether the M.L.A. of the local area who is a member of the Municipal Council is entitled to participate in the proceedings and if so his vote in the meeting is to be taken into account for the purpose of calculating 2/3rds of the total number of members of the Municipal Council.

4.

Section 11 of the Act provides for constitution of the Municipal Council. Section 11 reads as follows:--

"11. Constitution of Municipal Councils.--

(1) The Municipal Council shall consist of.-

(a) such number of directly elected councilorsspecified in column (3) of the table below in respect of the municipal areas specified in the corresponding entries in column (2) thereof, namely.--

TABLE

SI. No.

Population of the municipal area

Number of councilors

1

2

3

(1)

for a municipal area with a population of not less than 20,000 but less than 40,000

23

(2)

for a municipal area with a population of not less than 40,000 but less than 50,000

27

(3)

for a municipal area with a population of not less than 50,000 but less than one lakh

31

(4)

for a municipal area with a population of not less than one lakh but less than three lakhs.

35

(b) not more than five persons nominated by the Government from amongst the residents of the municipal area and who are,

(i) persons having special knowledge and experience in municipal administration or matters relating to health, town planning or education; or

(ii) social workers;

(c) the members of the House of the People and the members of the State Legislative Assembly, representing a part or whole of the municipal area whose constituencies lie within the municipal area and who are registered as electors within the municipal area.

(d) the members of the Council of States and members of the State Legislative Council registered as electors within the municipal area:

Provided that the persons referred to in clause (b) shall not have the right to vote in the meetings of the Municipal Council".

Under the proviso the person who is nominated as the councillors to the Municipal Council by the Government shall not have the right to vote in the meeting of the Municipal Council. But so far as the Members of the House of People and the members of the Legislative Assembly are concerned, there is no such prohibition or bar for them to participate and vote in the meeting of the Municipal Council. Section 2(6) defines the word ''councilors'' as follows.--

"councilors means any person who is legally a member of the Municipal Council or Town Panchayath".

5.

A member of the Legislative Assembly representing a part or whole of the Municipal area whose constituency lies within the Municipal area, is a person who is legally a member of a Municipal Council. It is not disputed that one Sri B. Shankaragowda, is a M.L.A. of Hospet constituency which lie within the Municipal area. Therefore, he is entitled to participate and vote in the Municipal Council as there is no bar for a M.L.A. of the Legislative Assembly to participate and vote. Therefore his participation and vote in the meeting is to be taken into account for the purpose of calculating 2/3rds of the total number of the members of the Municipal Council as provided u/s 42(9) of the Act. The 2/3rds of the total number of members of the Municipal Council comes to 24. In the case on hand, 24 persons have voted in favour of the resolution and 12 against the resolution. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to continue as the President of the Town Municipal Council since the motion of ''No Confidence'' moved against her has been carried by 2/3rds of the total number of members. In the result, I pass the following order.

Writ petition is rejected.