1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6034 OF 2006 Vikrant Bhimsen Chavan ...Petitioner Versus The Municipal Commissioner & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. K.K. Malpathak for the Petitioner Mr. R.S. Apte with Mr. Mandar Limaye for Respondent No. 1 Mr. S.N. Patil for Respondent No. 3 Mrs. M.P. Thakur, Assistant Government Pleader, for the State. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE: APRIL 22, 2009 P.C.:- The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.3, who is an elected Corporator, has incurred disqualification, and a show-cause notice was issued to him as early as on 20th May, 2006 by the Municipal Commissioner, in which instances were given by which he had become disqualified to continue as a Corporator. Surprisingly, the Municipal Corporation has not even cared to file its affidavit, although the Writ 2 Petition is pending in this Court from the year 2006. This is a classic case of the Municipal Commissioner not discharging his duties, and not even explaining the reasons for not taking any action in pursuance of the show-cause notice issued by him as early as in May, 2006. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for respondent No. 3. 3. We feel that once a show-cause notice has been issued, the Commissioner should have proceeded to pass the consequential orders. Respondent No. 3, who is a Councillor, has also not cared to reply to the notice, probably believing that no action would be taken against him, even if he does not respond to the show-cause notice, and if he had such belief, it appears that he was right in believing so, that no action could be taken against him. 4. We are not going into the merits of the case, because that would deprive respondent No. 3 of any genuine defence he may have to meet the show-cause notice, although it is reprehensible that he has not replied to the show-cause notice of the Commissioner of the same 3 Corporation, of which he continues to be a member and about which he claims that he has been elected about 5 times as a member. A person, who is elected and successively elected, is expected to obey law more than a common citizen. 5. Therefore, as a last chance, we give respondent No. 3 two weeks from today to file a reply to the show-cause notice dated 20th May, 2006. If no reply is filed within two weeks before the Commissioner, the right to file reply would stand closed. The Commissioner shall thereafter decide the matter, after giving him a fair chance of hearing, within two weeks thereafter. In any case, the matter shall end within four weeks from today. 6. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. BILAL NAZKI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.