tO l1 ^ \ E IN THE HI^ CaOBX OF JITOICaiOKE AT BIIASPOR (C.6.) WRIT PETITICN V0.4-i^3 /2004 EE'riTIONER Smt. Sunita Sharma, W/o. Shri Anil Sbarma, Aged about 36 years, R/o. Sadar Bazar Road, Balod, District Durg (C.G) VERSUS BESPONDENTS"7A ^y\/'G^ „•%.•' ^' ^' ^ J^ i't,'f!'^y" 3Sf' i^.^ ^^v 5. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Town Planning & Development, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) Director s Prescribed Authority, Town Planning s Development, RDA Building, Shastri Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Balod, District Durg (C.G.) Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Jamul, Distrxct Durg (C.6.) Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Bhatapara, Dlst.Raipur(C.G.) Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue),Balod, District Durg (C.G) Tahsildar, Balod, District Durg (C.G.) 'HRIT PE'riTION VSDER AR'I'ICLE 226/227 OF •EHE CONSTITOTICaT Or INDX& FOR XSSOaNCE OF WRII IN IHE VSXOSE OS CESXIOBSSI, MSNDBMOS, PROHIBITION AND FOR OIHER SVIfKBtS WRIT OR WKETS, OEDBR OR ORDERS, DIBECTION OR DIBECTXONS XI-HC-22 an^r^T h-U'h 311^1 ?b*4i<^ yf^d fT?\ ^j ~s^ •^wwi, dTf)'y'i<i, fani'My HWVfl •EbHlch 3TI^?T XRra? W.(?.'.^.^l^.^ozJoo '^ fN^ST' aii^r^giwHfOT 11.2004 On a tnention being siaS out oftum.' Petitioner by Smt. Fouzit Shri N. K. Agarwal, behalfofthe Respondents No, Shri Sanjay K. AgarwaJ], Respondent No.4. Shri Rajcev Shrivastavs Respondent No.5. The petitiouer has pi|i 226/227 ofthe Constitution amended notice dated 22.9.' P/ 3) whercby it has bccn iiifoi)a effected persons that the seat Coiuicfl, Balod has been resent In para 5.3 of the adoptiag erroneous procedurc rcscrvcd for thc O.B.C. catcgor|ir I have heard leamed Leamed. counsel for th{ provision of sub-rule (2) of the (Reservation of OfSce of M rcscrvation for thc scats of Badl of lot as nearly as possible, on^ ^. Mirza, Advocate, DeduU' Advocate Genei-al takes notice on |1, 2, 6and7. Advocate takes notice on behalf of Advocate takcs noticc on bchalf of peti]U) sbWf<-l''4'l-t 111'RTf 4 .fsiA TfSn^R ^sri^iiTsn^i e this Tnatter is taken up for hearing, 4f 20|34 bifmcd jefen-ed this petitiou iinder Article India questioniug fhe vaUdity of the published ia newspaper (Aiuiexure to Ocncral PubHc and conccmcd ^f President/ Chairperson of Munlcipal (ed for O.B.C, category. i|tion it has been inentioned that by Balod Municipal Councfl haa been coufctsel ia for the pard.es. .^ petitioaer argued that as per fhe [Rule 5 of Chhattisgarh Muiiicipalities |ayor and President) Rules, 1999, jkward Classes shall bc inadc bv draw fourth of the total ofiices; leaving the V. •-3T rt^Fifl^^ ^'frHrT'TO, 'R'^Mfff Lo.p. l^to. ^tl65/2-tf0^) ^Ti^^^T R^StT^-f ';r'i^"^VaEl lABi'3'SF^tJ '^S ^^ ^Ui,;: CT^^-EB'C fqsiw?) "^iHT; -^ -aT^ff 'S "f:§.^••'ff^ ^ ^T'"? ^^i Miuiicipality where reservati.o4 has been made for S,C. aud S.T, In fhe first in.stance, tbe respo^idents hari erroneously reserved tlie Municipal Council, Janiul fbr S.C. aad Bhatapara for O.B.C. thi'ough lots but later on, i-^aiizing the laistaice that ordcr wa.s 1 chaaged, therefore, whole ^xercise reseni'ing seats for O.B.C. categoiy caadidate ought to hdve been done again, On the other hand, Mamed counsel for the respondents argued ffaat as far as the reseijvation of Balod Municipal Coiuicil for O.B.C. catcgoiy is coaccnieA, that was donc by draw of lots, fherefore, the petitioner could not have any objection. It is true that as per th^ provision of sub-rule (2) of Rule 5 of the Rules, 1999 fhe respondei|ts were required to reserve the post of President/Chair Person ofthe O.B.C. categoiy by draw oflot, in this casc aftcr rcservation of fhrei l3l Muiucipal Couiicil for S.T. and four (4) for S.C., reservation! of 7 Municlpal Coiuicil was made through draw of lots for O.B|C. category and in that draw of lot Bhatapara Municipal Coun.ci( was also cnme to be reserved for s_ O.B.C. category. Tbereafter, 1lhe respondents came to kiiow that based on fhc incorrcct figurcs of S, C. population Jamul Muiiicipal Council was reserved for S.C. tiut, when tb.at mistake was detected, the respondents rectified tHat mistake and passed aa order reserviag the seat of Municipal Council, Jamul for O.B-C. aad Bhatapara for S.C. Tberefore, fcn that process tbe Miuiicipal Council Balod was not cffected in aiiy ^nanncr and Muiiicipal Council Balod was reserved. by draw of lot; a^ such, the petitiouer caruiot have any Xi-HC—78 's^ 7?iraT?pi, "s'atw^, ft^rey ^•P-^'^l^Jz-^ ».. 3-<^i -ass ft^N' WTT ail'sST a^» •iSpira'qR tiTtI^f •? fe'ST TraR^TC ^ ^^ c^it^T grievajice agamst the Nonfictton No. F, 4-181-B/18/2004, Raipiu- dated 30th September, 2004, ^)ublishe4 in tlie Cbliattisgarh Gsazette (extraoiTlinam dated ltt (j)ctober, 2004 wfaereby under tlie s provisions of sub-nilc (3) ofjRule 9 of thc RLiles 1999 the list of reserved post of President ^t Municipal Coiincil, inade on 19th Aiigust 2004 and amendedf notice dated 22.9,2004 has been notified. ! In view of the above. I flo not find anv substau.ee in tllis wnt pctition, whieh is liablc to bc (|isinisscd and it is disiiiisscd. Consequently, M(W)P N|o,4535/2004 and I.A. No.8452/2004 also staiid disposed of. Sd/- ~ L.C. Bhadoo Judge