1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9630 OF 2009 Indrajit alias Jitu Dinkarrao Salgar .. Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.I.M.Khairdi for the petitioner. Mr.S.D.Rayrikar A.G.P. for respondent no.1. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE, J. DATED : 19TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition challenges the order dated 12.11.2009 issued by respondent no.1 directing respondent no.2 to hold election of the Chairman of standing committee. Mr.Khairdi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was elected as a Chairman of the standing committee on 1.2.2009 for a period of one year from the date of his election and, therefore, the impugned order dated 12.11.2009, issuing direction to hold elections before completing the period of one year is illegal. Election of the Chairman of the standing committee is schedule to be held on 20.11.2009. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.P., I have perused the provisions of section 21 of the 2 Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (for short “the Act”). Sub-section (1) of section 21 provides that the standing committee shall at its first meeting after its appointment under sub-section (2) of section 20 and at its first meeting in the same month in each succeeding year appoint one of its own member to be the Chairman. 3. Admittedly, in the present case the standing committee held its first meeting sometime in October, 2005, and it had appointed its first Chairman under sub-section (2) of section 20 in the said meeting. Keeping that in view and having considered the language of sub-section (1) of section 21 of the Act, the standing committee is expected to hold its meetings for electing Chairman in the same month in each succeeding year i.e. October. In the present case, the election of the petitioner did not take place in October, 2008 in view of the order of stay granted by the civil court in R.C.S.No.768 of 2007 as well as R.C.S.No.917 of 2008. There is no dispute that the stay granted by the civil court was ultimately vacated by the District Court in Misc. Appeal and as a result thereof the election of the petitioner as a Chairman was held on 1.2.2009. In view thereof the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled for a term of one year commencing from 1.2.2009 cannot be sustained in law. It is mandatory for the standing committee to hold its meetings in the same month in each succeeding year, in which the first 3 meeting of the standing committee was held and to appoint its Chairman. In the circumstances I do not find any illegality in the directions issued by respondent no.1 warranting interference by this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the petition fails and dismissed as such. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)