IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14885 of 2008 1. NAGENDRA KUMAR SON OF LATE GOPI CHAND MAHTO RESIDENT OF MANER RASULPUR AT & P.O. & P.S. MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. 2. SUDHIR KUMAR SON OF SRI SHRI NARAYAN SAH RESIDENT OF MANER CHOWK, NEWATI MOHALLA P.S. MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. 3. VIJAY KUMAR SON OF SRI DHARAMNATH PRASAD RESIDENT OF NASIRGANJ, P.S. MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA. 4. THE MANER NAGAR PANCHAYAT THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. 5. THE MUNICIPAL EXECUITIVE OFFICER, MANER NAGAR PANCHAYAT, PATNA. 6. ANJU DEVI WIFE OF LATE SANJAY KUMAR, CHAIRMAN, MANER NAGAR PANCHAYAT, MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. 7. RABINDRA KUMAR SON OF SURAJ PRASAD @ SURAJ SAO, VICE CHAIRMAN, MANER NAGAR PANCHAYAT, MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. with CWJC No.15013 of 2008 FARID HUSSAIN KHAN SON OF LATE WAHID HUSSSAIN KHAN RESIDNET OF MOHALLA CHARHAZAAR, WARD NO. 2, P.O. & P.S. MANER, DISTT. PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. NAGAR PANCHAYAT, MANER THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PATNA. 3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NAGAR PANCHAYAT, MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. 4. CHAIRMAN, NAGAR PANCHAYAT, MANER, DIST. PATNA. - 2 - 5. VICE CHAIRMAN, NAGAR PANCHAYAT, MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. ----------- For the Petitioners :- M/S. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, Shivendra Kishore, Anshuman, & Rakesh Narayan Singh For the State :- Mr. Kumar Udai Bhanu Rai, G.A. IV & Mr. J. P. Karn, AAG IX For Maner Nagar Panchayat :- Mr. Madhav Roy. ---- 10 23/03/2010 All the petitioners of both the writ applications are aggrieved because they have been refused registration as contractors under Maner Nagar Panchayat. They further allege that close relatives of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the said Maner Nagar Panchayat have been illegally enrolled/registered as contractors and contract have been awarded to them. Contention of the petitioners is that insistence of Nagar Panchayat authorities that the contractors not only must be a resident of Maner Nagar Panchayat but they should also be payee of holding tax is not only arbitrary but violative of fundamental rights of the petitioners. The insistence of the respondents of residence as well as for being a holding tax payee of Nagar Panchayat in question creates a class among class amongst the contractors and it is not only violative of - 3 - Article 14 but also of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. No counter affidavit on behalf of the Chairman and Vice Chairman has been filed denying the allegation. Some small officials or Clerk of the said Nagar Panchayat have filed counter affidavit as well as supplementary affidavit. Their effort to justify the action of the respondents in the garb of powers which the Nagar Panchayat have is no answer to the right which a citizen has under Part III of the Constitution. In absence of any statute or legislation any resolution of Nagar Panchayat or any authority therein cannot have effect of taking away the right of the petitioners guaranteed under the Constitution. The requirement and the insistence of the respondents, therefore, not to register the petitioners in absence of evidence of their residence as well as payment of holding tax is contrary to and breach of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The petitioners have succeeded in making out a case for interference. The respondents would be duty bound to register the petitioners as contractors. In so far as other aspects of the matter with regard - 4 - to the award of contract and tender in favour of various relatives of the Chairman and Vice Chairman are concerned, that is a matter which can be enquired into under the provisions of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 and the parameters laid down therein. The petitioners have freedom to take recourse to the mechanism provided under the said Act. Since the contract has already been completed and the work carried out, no interference is required in this regard in these writ applications at this stage. Both the writ applications stand disposed of with the observation aforesaid. AMIN (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)