Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 324 (MAD)

A. Syed Ansari Alias Babu v. Union of India and Others

2000-03-23

K.G.BALAKRISHNAN, K.GOVINDARAJAN

body2000
Judgment :- K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, C.J. Petitioner a public spirited citizen, prays that the 4th respondent shall not be permitted to assume the Office of Chief Ministership of the Government of Union Territory of Pondicherry. The previous Ministry of the Union Territory of Pondicherry resigned and Her Excellency the Lt. Governor of Pondicherry invited another National party to form the government and the 4th respondent herein though he was not a member of the Legislative Assembly, was elected as the leader of the legislature party and he was sworn in as Chief Minister of Pondicherry Union Territory and he assumed the Office of Chief Ministership on 22-3-2000. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent is not a Member of the Legislative Assembly and he is not entitled to assume the office of Chief Ministership of Pondicherry Union Territory as the period of the present term of the Legislative Assembly of Pondicherry would expire by the end of April 1, 2001 and the 4th respondent has to become a Member of the Legislative Assembly contesting the bye-election to be conducted within this period. It is also submitted by the petitioner's counsel that at present there are 33 members of the Legislative Assembly and out of them 30 are elected Members and three are nominated and as there is no vacancy for the time being and if at all the 4th respondent has to become a Member of the Legislative Assembly, one member of the legislature has to submit resignation and in the resulting vacancy the 4th respondent would be able to contest, for the seat in the legislature and if only he becomes a member of the Legislative Assembly he can continue as Chief Minister. 2. Counsel for the petitioner argued that in view of Section 151-A of Representation of the People Act, 1951 the bye-election is not easily possible. 2. Counsel for the petitioner argued that in view of Section 151-A of Representation of the People Act, 1951 the bye-election is not easily possible. Section 151-A of the Act reads as follows:- 151-A : Time limit for filling vacancies referred to in Sections 147, 149, 150 and 151:- Notwithstanding anything contained in section 147, section 149, section 150 and section 151, a bye-election for filling any vacancy referred to in any of the said sections shall be held within a period of six months from the date of the occurrence of the vacancy : Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply, if, (a) the remainder of the term of a member in relation to a vacancy is less than one year, or (b) the Election Commission in consultation with the Central Government certifies that it is difficult to hold the bye-election within the said period." 3. Based on the proviso (a) to Section 151-A of the said Act, counsel for the petitioner contended that if the remainder of the period of the Legislative Assembly is less than one year, the Election Commissioner can even refuse to conduct a bye-election and in that event the 4th respondent may not get a chance of even to become a Member of the Legislative Assembly and in that event he would cease to be the Chief Minister of the State. Therefore it is submitted that the provisions contained in Section 45(5) of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 which is an enabling provision is misused for inducting the 4th respondent as the Chief Minister. Section 45(5) would enable a person to become the Minister even though he is not a Member of the Legislative Assembly. Section 45(5) of the said Act states that if a Minister who for any period of six consecutive months is not a member of the Legislative Assembly of the Union Territory shall at the expiration of that period cease to be a Minister. Though the above provision is an enabling provision, it cannot be contended that a person who is not a member of the Legislative Assembly cannot become a Minister and the said provision was misused in the instant case. 4. There is nearly one year period to expire the term of the Legislative Assembly of Pondicherry Union Territory. Though the above provision is an enabling provision, it cannot be contended that a person who is not a member of the Legislative Assembly cannot become a Minister and the said provision was misused in the instant case. 4. There is nearly one year period to expire the term of the Legislative Assembly of Pondicherry Union Territory. There is sufficient time for the 4th respondent to become a Member of the Legislative Assembly. Therefore the proviso (a) to Section 151-A may not be a fetter to his being a member of the Legislative Assembly. We do not find any force in the contention raised by the petitioner's counsel. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, W. M. P. No. 7531 of 2000 is also dismissed. Petition dismissed.