Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act

Delhi Mayor Election - Supreme Court Rules Against BJP on Nominated Members' Voting Rights

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court on 17th Feb 2023 while deciding the petition (Shelly Oberoi & Oth. Vs Office of Lieutenant Governor of Delhi & Ors D.D. 17th Feb 2023) regarding Mayor Election of Delhi directed to issue notice convening the first meeting of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi within a period of twenty-four hours.

AAP Party has been filed in the Supreme Court of India's Civil Original Jurisdiction, seeking various reliefs related to the constitution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi after the elections held on 4 December 2022.

The first petitioner is a prospective candidate for the post of Mayor, and the election of the Mayor has not been held even after two months since the election.

Chapter II of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957 deals with the establishment of Corporations, and Section 35(1) provides for the election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor at the first meeting of the Corporation each year.

The composition of the Corporation is specified under Section 3, and among the Councillors, there are ten persons nominated by the Administrator who do not have the right to vote in the meetings of the Corporation.

Chapter V of the Act deals with the procedure and transaction of business by the Corporation, and Section 73 provides for the first meeting of the Corporation after a general election, which shall be convened by the Administrator.

The point of controversy has narrowed down to two issues: whether the nominated aldermen have the right to vote at the first meeting of the Corporation where the Mayor would be elected, and the order for holding elections, i.e., whether the election to the office of the Mayor shall be held first followed by the elections to the Deputy Mayor and other members of the Standing Committee.

The petitioners' submission is that the nominated members of the Corporation do not have the right to vote, including at the election of the Mayor.

The submission on behalf of the Lt Governor and Municipal Corporation is that the restriction on the right to vote in terms of Article 243R(2) as well as the proviso to Section 3(3)(b) (i) applies only to the regular meetings of the Corporation where the business of the Municipal Corporation is transacted and would not extend to the first meeting after the elections are held.

Section 73 requires the first meeting of the Corporation to be convened by the Administrator and Section 35 stipulates that at its first meeting the Corporation shall elect one of its members as a Mayor and another to be a Deputy Mayor. It has been submitted that the prohibition on the exercise of the right to vote which attaches to the nominated members does not extend.

The Supreme Court rejected the arguments put forth by the Municipal Corporation and Lt. Governor in regards to the right of nominated members to vote in meetings of the Corporation. The Court pointed out that Article 243R of the Constitution provides for the composition of Municipalities, which includes direct election to all seats except for those specified in clause (2). The clause contains provisions for representation of persons with special knowledge or experience in Municipal administration, but the Constitution and the Act impose a restriction that such nominated members do not have the right to vote in meetings of the Corporation, including the first meeting where the Mayor and Deputy Mayor are elected.

The Court emphasized Regulation 7 and 8 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Procedure and Conduct of Business) Regulations 1958, which stipulate that the election of the Mayor must be held first, followed by the election of the Deputy Mayor with the Mayor as the presiding authority.

Supreme Court issued following directions: -

(i)      At the first meeting of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the election shall be held first for the post of Mayor and at that election, the members who are nominated in terms of Section 3(3)(b)(i) of the Act shall not have the right to vote;

(ii)      Upon the election of the Mayor, the Mayor shall act as the presiding authority for conducting the election of the Deputy Mayor and the members of the Standing Committee at which also the prohibition on the exercise of vote by the nominated members in terms of Section 3(3)(b)(i) shall continue to operate; and

(iii)     The notice convening the first meeting of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi shall be issued within a period of twenty-four hours.  The notice shall fix the date for convening the first meeting at which the election of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and members of the Standing Committee shall be conducted in terms of the above directions.

Petition Allowed.

Shelly Oberoi & Oth. Vs  Office of Lieutenant Governor of Delhi & Ors

Latest Legal News