1 WP6862/10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6862 OF 2010 Shri Nihal Ahmed M.M. Usman ...Petitioner v/s Malegaon Municipal Corporation and others ...Respondents Mr A.V. Anturkar i/b Mr S.B. Deshmukh for Petitioner. Mr S.S. Patwardhan for Respondent Nos.3 and 4. Mr M.M. Vashi i/b M/s M.P. Vashi and Associates for Respondent No.6. CORAM : D.K.DESHMUKH AND R.G. KETKAR JJ. DATE : 5TH JULY 2011. 2 WP6862/10 P.C. :- 1] By this petition, the petitioner who is a Councilor of Malegaon Municipal Corporation, challenges the minutes of the meeting dated 31st July 2010. According to the petitioner, the Mayor of the Corporation declined to consult the petitioner on the ground that he is not a leader of Janata Dal (S) party. According to the petitioner, he is a leader of the Municipal Corporation Party, Janata Dal (S) and therefore, he should have been consulted in the process of nominating a member on the Standing Committee. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. We have perused the record. Perusal of the Resolution dated 31st July 2010 itself shows that after the elections of the Corporation, the petitioner claiming to be leader of Janata Dal (S) Party consisting of 12 Corporators who are elected on the tickets of Janata Dal(S) and one person who was elected as Independent, submitted a declaration under the provisions of the Maharashtra Local Authorities 3 WP6862/10 Members Disqualification Act 1987 and claimed that he is leader of Janata Dal(S) Corporation Party consisting of 13 members. However, it appears that that claim was rejected by the Divisional Commissioner, Nasik by his order dated 27th June 2007. Admittedly, this order was never challenged by the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that under the Maharashtra Local Authorities Members Disqualification Rules, the Commissioner has no power to reject any claim and therefore, the order of the Commissioner dated 27th June 2007 is unauthorised. Even assuming that the order is unauthorised, it will continue in force unless it is challenged and set aside by a Competent Court or authority. The order is not challenged and therefore, it is in force. It appears from the proceedings of that meeting that thereafter an application was made by the petitioner to the Commissioner, styling himself as leader of Janata Dal(S) Corporation Party, consisting of 12 members, but it is mentioned in the order that necessary declarations in Form 1 and Form 3 were not submitted 4 WP6862/10 and it appears that for these reasons, the Mayor has not treated the petitioner as leader of Janata Dal (S) Corporation Party. In our opinion, the reasons that have been given by the Mayor for not treating petitioner as leader of Janata Dal (S) Corporation Party cannot be said to be absolutely illegal or without foundation. In our opinion, therefore, the Mayor was justified in the facts and circumstances and in view of the claims and counter claims being made in not treating the petitioner as leader of Janata Dal(S) Corporation Party. Petition therefore fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Sheristedar / Private Secretary of this Court. Certified copy expedited. ( JUSTICE D.K. DESHMUKH ) ( JUSTICE R.G. KETKAR )