Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 549 (TS)

Barigela Hemalatha v. State of Telangana

2022-08-24

C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, UJJAL BHUYAN

body2022
ORDER : Ujjal Bhuyan, J. Heard Mr. D.Y.L.N. Charyulu, learned counsel for the petitioners; and Mr. Radhive Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General for the official respondents. 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs : (1) to declare clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 as illegal, ultra vires and unconstitutional; (2) to declare Section 20 of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 to the extent it enables members referred to in clauses (b) and (c) of subsection (3) of Section 5 of the aforesaid Act to participate in the election of chairperson, and vicechairperson of a Municipality as illegal, ultra vires and unconstitutional; and (3) to set aside the election of chairperson and deputy chairperson of Tukkuguda Municipality. 3. Facts leading to filing of the present writ petition may be summarised as under : 3.1. Three petitioners have joined together and have filed the present writ petition. They are elected ward members of Tukkuguda Municipality having been elected from their respective wards as candidates belonging to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). 3.2. Second respondent i.e., State Election Commissioner, Telangana issued election notification dated 07.01.2020 for holding elections to elect members of the wards in Municipalities and Municipal Corporations in the State of Telangana. The election notification was issued in accordance with the provisions contained in the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 (briefly, ‘the 2019 Act’ hereinafter). 3.3. Elections were held on 22.01.2020 in which petitioners contested for the post of Ward Member from different wards of Tukkuguda Municipality in Ranga Reddy District on behalf of BJP. After the elections were over, counting took place on 25.01.2020. It may be mentioned that there are a total of 15 seats of Ward Member in Tukkuguda Municipality. At the end of counting of votes, BJP won nine seats, TRS political party won five seats and one seat was won by an independent candidate. Among the victorious BJP candidates, the three petitioners were also included. 3.4. Notification was issued on 23.01.2020 by the second respondent for holding elections amongst the elected ward members to fill up the posts of chairperson and vice chairperson of Municipalities and Municipal Corporations, including Tukkuguda Municipality, under Section 194(1) and 195(5) read with Section 20 of the 2019 Act. Among the victorious BJP candidates, the three petitioners were also included. 3.4. Notification was issued on 23.01.2020 by the second respondent for holding elections amongst the elected ward members to fill up the posts of chairperson and vice chairperson of Municipalities and Municipal Corporations, including Tukkuguda Municipality, under Section 194(1) and 195(5) read with Section 20 of the 2019 Act. Following the same, third respondent issued notices under Section 5(3) of the 2019 Act to the public representatives, viz., Member of Legislative Assembly, Member of House of People, Member of Council of States and Member of Legislative Council who are ex officio members. 3.5. First respondent also issued a notice dated 25.01.2020 seeking clarifications from the public representatives within the ambit of Section 5(2) and (3) of the 2019 Act seeking the options from the ex officio members to be communicated to the Municipal Commissioners by 26.01.2020. 3.6. Election for the posts of chairperson and vice chairperson was conducted by the third respondent in so far Tukkuguda Municipality is concerned on 27.01.2020. In the said election, the fourth respondent allowed the seventh respondent to attend the meeting and to cast vote as an ex officio member. 3.7. It is stated that seventh respondent Dr. K. Keshav Rao is a Member of the Council of States i.e., Rajya Sabha from the State of Andhra Pradesh. He cast his vote on behalf of the ruling TRS political party. Elaborating further, it is stated that seventh respondent was originally elected to the Rajya Sabha from the combined State of Andhra Pradesh. After formation of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh States, he was declared elected as Member of Parliament of Rajya Sabha from the State of Andhra Pradesh in the draw of lots held on 30.05.2014. 3.8. Thus, contention of the petitioners is that seventh respondent could not have been invited to join Tukkuguda Municipality as an ex officio member. His participation and casting of vote in the election for the post of chairperson and vice-chairperson on 27.01.2020 was illegal. Because of such illegality, petitioners could not get elected as chairperson and vice-chairperson. As a matter of fact, petitioner No.1 lost the election for the post of chairperson by one vote. Had seventh respondent not cast his vote against petitioner No.1, he would not have lost the election. Similar is the position with respect to respondent Nos.8 and 9. Because of such illegality, petitioners could not get elected as chairperson and vice-chairperson. As a matter of fact, petitioner No.1 lost the election for the post of chairperson by one vote. Had seventh respondent not cast his vote against petitioner No.1, he would not have lost the election. Similar is the position with respect to respondent Nos.8 and 9. They are not registered as voters/electors within the Municipal Area of the Municipality. 3.9. Petitioners have filed election petitions being O.P.No.116 of 2020 and O.P.Nos.121 to 124 of 2020 before the Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy District cum Election Tribunal constituted under the 2019 Act. The said election petitions are pending. 3.10. In the writ affidavit petitioners have clarified that in the present writ proceeding, the challenge made is to the provisions of Section 5(3)(b) and (c) of the 2019 Act as well as to Section 20 of the 2019 Act. 4. The writ petition was admitted by this Court on 31.08.2021, whereafter several opportunities were granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit. Counter affidavit has not been filed. 5. In the hearing held on 08.08.2022, this Court took the view that since interpretation of Sections 5(3)(b) and (c) and 20 of the 2019 Act is under consideration, the same being a legal issue, counter affidavit was not necessary. However, liberty was granted to the parties including the respondents to file written submissions. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset has referred to Article 243R of the Constitution of India and thereafter submits that the impugned provisions are contrary to the mandate of Article 243R of the Constitution of India. He submits that allowing Members of the Council of States and Members of Legislative Council to be ex officio member of any Municipality and allowing them to participate in elections by casting votes would be against the letter and spirit of Article 243R of the Constitution. According to him permitting a Member of Council of States to choose as an ex officio member, anyone of the Municipalities in the State is contrary to Article 243R (ii) and (iii) of the Constitution. The ex officio member must be registered as a voter within the Municipal Area of the Municipality as defined under the 2019 Act. According to him permitting a Member of Council of States to choose as an ex officio member, anyone of the Municipalities in the State is contrary to Article 243R (ii) and (iii) of the Constitution. The ex officio member must be registered as a voter within the Municipal Area of the Municipality as defined under the 2019 Act. Therefore, the seventh respondent could not have participated in the election and cast his vote under any circumstances being a Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha) from the State of Andhra Pradesh. 7. In so far respondent Nos.8 and 9 are concerned, respondent No.8 is a voter of LB Nagar constituency which does not come within Tukkuguda Municipality. Likewise respondent No.9 is a voter of Uppal constituency which again is not within Tukkuguda Municipality. After his tenure as Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament is over, respondent No.7 has enrolled as a voter in the Khairatabad Assembly Constituency which is also far away from Tukkuguda Municipality. Therefore, it was not only improper but also illegal on the part of respondent Nos.3 and 4 to have allowed respondent Nos.7 to 9 to participate in the election for the post of chairperson and vice-chairperson of the Tukkuguda Municipality as ex officio members. Their casting of votes materially affected the electoral outcome leading to defeat of petitioner No.1. 8. Thus, respondent No.5 got elected as chairperson and respondent No.6 got elected as vice-chairperson of Tukkuguda Municipality on the strength of votes of the ex officio members (respondent Nos.7 to 9) who were not eligible to be such members of the Municipality and to cast vote. 9. In the above factual background, petitioners have made the above challenge primarily on the ground that Section 5(3)(b) and (c) of the 2019 Act is contrary to the constitutional mandate under Article 243R of the Constitution of India and therefore, should be struck down as unconstitutional. 10. On the other hand, Mr. Radhive Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader for the official respondents on the basis of the written submissions, which is treated as the stand of the official respondents, has argued that there is no legally permissible ground to declare the impugned provision of the statute as ultra vires. 10. On the other hand, Mr. Radhive Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader for the official respondents on the basis of the written submissions, which is treated as the stand of the official respondents, has argued that there is no legally permissible ground to declare the impugned provision of the statute as ultra vires. State of Telangana has got the legislative competence to enact a law as envisaged in Article 243R of the Constitution of India which is traceable to Entry 5 of List II of the Seventh Schedule. 10.1. In so far Rajya Sabha Members are concerned, the concept of domicile would not apply. He submits that petitioners have already availed the statutory remedy by filing election petitions being O.P.Nos.116 of 2020 and O.P.Nos.121 to 124 of 2020 which are pending on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy District acting as Election Tribunal constituted under the 2019 Act. As the petitioners have availed the remedy as provided under the statute, the writ petition should not be entertained. He asserts that in any case provisions of Section 5(3)(b) and (c) of the 2019 Act read with Section 20 thereof cannot be construed as contrary to Article 243R of the Constitution of India. 11. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have received the due consideration of the Court. Also perused the materials on record. 12. At the outset, let us deal with the relevant constitutional provisions. The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 inserted Part-IX-A containing Article 243P to Article 243ZG in the Constitution with effect from 01.06.1993. Part IX-A deals with Municipalities. The municipalities or local self-Government pertaining to urban bodies were brought under the constitutional scheme by virtue of the 74th Amendment inserting Part IX-A into the Constitution. Article 243P(d) defines ‘Municipal Area’ to mean the territorial area of a Municipality as is notified by the Governor. Article 243Q provides for constitution of Municipalities, such as, Nagar Panchayat, Municipal Council and Municipal Corporation. However, in the present proceeding, we are really concerned with Article 243R, which reads as under : 243-R. Composition of Municipalities.- (1) Save as provided in clause (2), all the seats in a Municipality shall be filled by persons chosen by direct election from the territorial constituencies in the Municipal area and for this purpose each Municipal area shall be divided into territorial constituencies to be known as wards. (2) The Legislature of a State may, by law, provide – (a) for the representation in a Municipality of – (i) persons having special knowledge or experience in Municipal administration; (ii) the members of the House of the People and the members of the Legislative Assembly of the State representing constituencies which comprise wholly or partly the Municipal area; (iii) the members of the Council of States and the members of the Legislative Council of the State registered as electors within the Municipal area; (iv) the Chairpersons of the Committees constituted under clause (5) of Article 243-S: Provided that the persons referred to in paragraph (i) shall not have the right to vote in the meetings of the Municipality; (b) the manner of election of the Chairperson of a Municipality. 13. From the above, we find that as per clause (1) of Article 243R all the seats in the Municipality shall be filled up by persons chosen by direct election from the territorial constituencies in the Municipal Area. For this purpose, each Municipal Area is divided into territorial constituencies to be known as wards. However, clause (2) mentions that the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for representation in the Municipality by the following categories of persons : (i) Persons having special knowledge or experience in Municipal administration; (ii) Members of the House of the People (MP-Lok Sabha) and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the State (MLA) representing constituencies which comprise wholly or partly the Municipal Area; (iii) Members of the Council of States (MP-Rajya Sabha) and Members of the Legislative Council (MLC) registered as electors/voters in the Municipal Area; (iv) Chairpersons of the Committees constituted under clause (5) of Article 243S; provided that the persons referred to in paragraph (i) shall not have the right to vote in the meetings of the municipalities. 13.1. Clause 2 (b) of Article 243R says that the legislature of a State, may by law, provide for the manner of election of the Chairperson of a Municipality. 14. From the above, it is evident that clause (1) provides for direct election to the Municipality divided into territorial constituencies called “wards”. In other words, for each ward there shall be a direct election and the winning candidate by way of direct election shall represent the concerned ward. 14. From the above, it is evident that clause (1) provides for direct election to the Municipality divided into territorial constituencies called “wards”. In other words, for each ward there shall be a direct election and the winning candidate by way of direct election shall represent the concerned ward. For the purpose of the present proceeding, we are concerned with clause 2 (a) (ii) and (iii). As per the clause 2 (a) (ii), the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for representation in the Municipality by a Lok Sabha MP and MLA of the State, whose constituencies comprise wholly or partly the Municipal Area. Though the word “State” has not been defined, it is axiomatic that the word “State” can only mean that State within the territory of which the Municipality is situate. In other words, Lok Sabha MP and the MLA must first belong to the State within which territory the Municipality is situate; secondly, the constituencies which they represent must comprise wholly or partly the Municipal Area of the Municipality. 15. In so far clause 2 (a) (iii) is concerned, the Legislature of a State, may by law, provide for the representation in the Municipality the MP of Rajya Sabha and MLC of the State, but they must be registered as voters/electors within the Municipal Area of the Municipality. Therefore, MP of Rajya Sabha and/or a MLC of the State can be nominated as a member of any Municipality, provided they are MP and MLC of the State within which territory the Municipality is situated. But more importantly, to be nominated as members of such a Municipality, the Rajya Sabha MP and the MLC of the State must be registered as voters/electors within the Municipal Area of the Municipality. 16. Article 243S of the Constitution of India deals with constitution and composition of Wards Committees etc. As per sub-section (1), there shall be constituted Wards Committees, consisting of one or more wards, within the territorial limits of a Municipality having a population of three lakhs or more. Sub-section (2) says that Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with respect to the composition and territorial area of a Wards Committee and the manner in which the seats in a Wards Committee shall be filled. Sub-section (2) says that Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with respect to the composition and territorial area of a Wards Committee and the manner in which the seats in a Wards Committee shall be filled. Sub-section (3) provides that a member of a Municipality representing a ward within the territorial area of the Wards Committee shall be a member of that committee. In terms of sub-section (4), where a Wards Committee consists of one ward, the member representing that ward in the Municipality; or two or more wards, one of the members representing such wards in the Municipality elected by the members of the Wards Committee, shall be the chairperson of that Committee. Sub-section (5) mentions that nothing in Article 243S shall be deemed to prevent the Legislature of a State from making any provision for the constitution of Committees in addition to the Wards Committees. 17. A conjoint reading of Article 243R (2) (iv) and Article 243S (5) would go to show that Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for constitution of Committees in addition to the Wards Committees and chairpersons of such Committees would have the option of representation in a Municipality. 18. In terms of Part IX-A of the Constitution, the State of Telangana enacted the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 (already referred to as “2019 Act”). It is an Act to consolidate and provide for the constitution of Municipalities (Municipal Councils and Municipal Corporations) other than Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation in the State of Telangana in terms of Part IX-A of the Constitution. Sections 5 and 20 of the 2019 Act are relevant. Section 5 reads as under : 5. Composition of Municipality.- (1) In each Municipality, there shall be a Municipal Council or a Municipal Corporation having authority over the Municipality. (2) The Municipal Council or the Municipal Corporation as the case may be, shall consist of such number of Ward Members elected in direct elections conducted to the Municipality, as specified in column No.4 of the Schedule-I and Schedule-II respectively. (2) The Municipal Council or the Municipal Corporation as the case may be, shall consist of such number of Ward Members elected in direct elections conducted to the Municipality, as specified in column No.4 of the Schedule-I and Schedule-II respectively. (3) In addition to the elected members specified in sub-section (2), the following shall also be members in the Municipality: (a) Member of the Legislative Assembly of the State, representing the constituency, of which a Municipality or a portion thereof forms part, (b) Member of the House of People, representing the constituency of which a Municipality or a portion thereof forms part: Provided that a Member of the Legislative Assembly, and a Member of the House of People, representing a constituency which comprises more than one Municipality, including a part of any Municipality, shall be the ex-officio member of one such Municipality, which he/she chooses within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of conduct of ordinary elections to the Municipality, or from the date of election as a member of Legislative Assembly or of the House of People as the case may be, by notice, in writing, duly signed by him and delivered to the Commissioner of that Municipality: Provided further that the intimation so delivered shall be final and irrevocable, and in default of such intimation within the aforesaid period, the District Election Authority shall decide the Municipality, and inform the Member of Legislative Assembly or of the House of People as the case may be. (c) Member of the Legislative Council of the State: Provided that a member- (i) elected to the Legislative Council by the electorate of local authorities as provided in Article 171 (3) (a) of the Constitution of India. (ii) elected to the Legislative Council by the electorate consisting of graduates as provided in Article 171 (3) (b) of the Constitution of India. (iii) elected to the Legislative Council by the electorate consisting of the teachers as provided in Article 171 (3) (c) of the Constitution of India. (ii) elected to the Legislative Council by the electorate consisting of graduates as provided in Article 171 (3) (b) of the Constitution of India. (iii) elected to the Legislative Council by the electorate consisting of the teachers as provided in Article 171 (3) (c) of the Constitution of India. (iv) elected to the Legislative Council by the members of the Legislative Assembly as provided in Article 171 (3) (d) of the Constitution of India, and (v) nominated by the Governor as provided in Article 171 (3) (e) of the Constitution of India shall choose to be ex-officio member of any one of the Municipalities in his jurisdiction within a period of thirty days from the date of conduct of ordinary elections to the Municipality, or from the date of election as a Member of Legislative Council, as the case may be, and deliver to the Commissioner of that Municipality, by notice, in writing, duly signed by him: Provided further that the intimation so delivered shall be final and irrevocable, and in default of such intimation within the aforesaid period, the District Election Authority shall decide the Municipality and inform the Member of Legislative Council; (d) Member of the Council of States: Provided that a member of the Council of the State shall choose to be an ex-officio member of any one of the Municipalities in the State within a period of thirty days from the date of conduct of ordinary elections to the Municipality, or from the date of election as a Member of Council of State as the case may be, and deliver to the Commissioner of that Municipality, by notice, in writing, duly signed by him: Provided further that the intimation so delivered shall be final and irrevocable, and in default of such intimation within the aforesaid period, the District Election Authority shall decide the Municipality and inform the Member of Council of States: (e) The ex-officio members referred to in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) shall have the right to speak and take part in the proceedings of any meeting of the Municipalities within the jurisdiction, and shall have right to vote in the Municipality he/she has chosen. (4) Two persons in the case of municipal council and three persons in case of Municipal Corporations having special knowledge or experience in municipal administration co-opted by the members specified in sub-sections (2) and (3), as prescribed and the persons should be the registered voters in the Municipality and they should possess the age not less than twenty one (21) years as on the date of notification and one amongst them shall be a woman. (5) Two persons belonging to minority community co-opted by the members specified in sub-sections (2) and (3) as prescribed and the persons should be the registered voters in the Municipality and they should possess the age not less than twenty one (21) years as on the date of notification and one amongst them shall be a woman: Provided that while co-opting members from minority community, preference shall be given to such members who are not represented in the Municipality through direct elections: Provided further that the members co-opted under sub-sections (4) and (5) shall have a right to participate in the meetings of the Municipality but shall have no right to vote. (6) In the event of any member of the Municipality getting elected as a Member of the Legislature of the State or of Parliament or any other elected post, he shall submit his resignation as member of the Municipality or the newly elected post of Legislature of the State or of Parliament or any other elected post, within a period of 15 days from the date of such election. In the absence of such resignation he shall be deemed to have resigned from the office of member of the Municipality. 19. From a careful reading of Section 5, as extracted above, it is seen that as per sub-section (1), in each Municipality there shall be a Municipal Council or a Municipal Corporation having authority over the Municipality or the Municipal Corporation. Sub-section (2) says that the Municipal Council or the Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, shall consist of such number of ward members elected by way of direct election conducted to the Municipality. Sub-section (3) deals with nominated members or ex officio members. Sub-section (2) says that the Municipal Council or the Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, shall consist of such number of ward members elected by way of direct election conducted to the Municipality. Sub-section (3) deals with nominated members or ex officio members. It says that in addition to the elected members, as specified in subsection (2), the following shall also be members of a Municipality : (1) MLA of the State whose constituency includes the Municipality or a portion thereof; (2) Lok Sabha MP representing the constituency of which the Municipality or a portion thereof forms part. 19.1. The proviso clarifies that if the constituency of the Lok Sabha MP or MLA comprises more than one Municipality, including a part of any Municipality, then he can become the ex officio member of only one such Municipality which he must decide within a period of 30 days from the date of election to the Municipality or from the date of election as MLA or Lok Sabha MP, as the case may be. This must be intimated by him by way of a notice in writing duly signed by him and delivered to the Commissioner of the concerned Municipality. As per the second proviso, such intimation is final and irrevocable. However, if the Lok Sabha MP or MLA defaults in conveying such intimation, the District Election Authority shall decide the Municipality and inform the Lok Sabha MP or MLA accordingly. 20. In respect of MLC of the State, as provided in subsection 3(c) of Section 5, he can be nominated to a Municipality provided he is elected to the legislative council by the electorate of the local authorities as provided in Article 171 (3) (a) of the Constitution; he is elected to the legislative council by the electorate consisting of graduates as provided in Article 171 (3) (b) of the Constitution; he is elected to the legislative council by the electorate consisting of teachers as provided in Article 171 (3) (c) of the Constitution; he is elected to the legislative council by the members of the legislative assembly as provided in Article 171 (3) (d) of the Constitution; and he is nominated by the Governor as provided in Article 171 (3) (e) of the Constitution. 21. 21. The above categories of MLCs shall choose to be the ex officio members of any of the Municipalities in his jurisdiction within a period of 30 days from the date of conduct of ordinary election to the Municipality or from the date of election as a member of legislative council, as the case may be, and deliver to the Commissioner of that Municipality a notice in writing duly signed by him. Such intimation shall be final and irrevocable, and if defaults in conveying such intimation, it is the District Election Authority that shall decide the Municipality and inform the member of legislative council. 22. In so far Member of Parliament of Rajya Sabha is concerned, he is at liberty to choose any one of the Municipality in the State to be an ex officio member thereof within a period of thirty days from the date of conduct of ordinary election to the Municipality, and deliver to the Commissioner of that Municipality by notice in writing duly signed by him. Such intimation so delivered shall be final and irrevocable. In default of such intimation, the District Election Authority shall decide the Municipality and inform the Member of Council of the State. 23. The ex officio members referred to in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) shall have the right to participate in the proceedings of any meeting of the concerned Municipality within their jurisdiction and shall have the right to vote in the Municipality he/she has chosen. 24. From a comparative analysis of Article 243R (2) (a) (iii) on the one hand and Section 5 (3) (c) and (d) on the other hand, it is clearly evident that the State enactment travels much beyond the constitutional limitation. The constitutional requirement is that a Rajya Sabha MP and a MLC can be nominated as a member of the Municipality, provided he is a registered elector/voter within the Municipal Area of the said Municipality but there is no such limitation in Section 5 (3) (c) and (d) of the 2019 Act. 25. Section 2 (48) of the 2019 Act defines “local area” to mean the entire area notified as Municipal Area of the Municipality and includes any town, village, hamlet, bazar, station or other area or any group of the same in the immediate neighbourhood of one another. 25. Section 2 (48) of the 2019 Act defines “local area” to mean the entire area notified as Municipal Area of the Municipality and includes any town, village, hamlet, bazar, station or other area or any group of the same in the immediate neighbourhood of one another. This definition of “local area” has to be read in conjunction with the definition of ‘Municipal Area’ as defined under Article 243P (d) of the Constitution. 25.1. “Member” has been defined in Section 2 (53) of the 2019 Act to mean elected members, ex officio and co-opted members of a Municipality. 25.2. As per Section 2 (56) of the 2019 Act, “Municipality” has been defined to mean an institution of self government constituted under Article 243S of the Constitution and includes a Municipal Corporation and a Municipal Council as declared and notified under the 2019 Act. The expression “Municipality” shall be construed as Municipal Council or Municipal Corporation wherever the context so requires and unless otherwise provided under the 2019 Act. 26. At this stage, we may also advert to Section 20 of the 2019 Act, which reads as under : 20. Election of Chairperson and Vice-chairperson- (1) In terms of the rules prescribed under this Act, the elected members referred to in sub-section (2), and ex-officio members referred in clauses (a) (b) (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 5 of this Act, shall elect one of its elected members to be its Chairperson and another to be its Vice-Chairperson in the case of Municipality; and to be its Mayor and another to be its Deputy Mayor in case of Municipal Corporation at the first meeting of the Municipality, after elections. They will be elected by show of hands on party whip. If the Chairperson or Mayor and Vice-Chairperson or Deputy Mayor are not elected in such meeting, the fresh election shall be held on the consecutive day. The names of the persons so elected shall be published in the prescribed manner. Any vacancy in the said offices shall be filled in the same manner as a casual election, and the persons so elected in such vacancy shall enter upon office forthwith and hold office for the remaining period of the person in whose place he is elected. The names of the persons so elected shall be published in the prescribed manner. Any vacancy in the said offices shall be filled in the same manner as a casual election, and the persons so elected in such vacancy shall enter upon office forthwith and hold office for the remaining period of the person in whose place he is elected. (2) A member voting under sub-section (1) in disregard or disobedience of the party whip shall cease to hold office and the vacancy caused by such cessation shall be filled as a casual vacancy. (3) The Chairperson or Mayor and the Vice-Chairperson or Deputy Mayor as the case may be, shall assume the office on his being declared as such, and hold office in accordance with the provisions of this Act, unless resigned or removed on any other reason in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 26.1. Section 20, as extracted above, deals with election of chairperson and vice chairman of a Municipality and Municipal Corporation, though in this proceeding we are concerned with Municipality. As per sub-section (1), the elected members referred to in sub-section (2) and the ex officio members referred to in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the 2019 Act shall elect one of the elected members the chairperson and another to be the vice chairperson in the case of a Municipality; to be the Mayor and another to be the Deputy Mayor in the case of a Municipal Corporation in the first meeting after the elections. The elections shall be conducted by show of hands on party whip. If the chairperson or the Mayor and the vice chairperson or the Deputy Mayor are not elected in such meeting, fresh election shall be held on the consecutive day. The other provisions of Section 20 are not very relevant for the present case. 27. From a conjoint reading of Section 5 (3) and Section 20 of the 2019 Act, it is evident that a Rajya Sabha MP or a State MLC, who is not a registered elector/voter within the Municipal Area of the Municipality, can still be nominated as an ex officio member to the Municipality and cast his vote. This, in our opinion, is clearly contrary to the constitutional mandate expressed through Article 243R of the Constitution. This, in our opinion, is clearly contrary to the constitutional mandate expressed through Article 243R of the Constitution. While Article 243R (2) empowers the Legislature of the State to make laws for representation in a Municipality of ex officio members and also the manner of election of the Chairperson of the Municipality, the law so enacted by the State i.e., the 2019 Act has clearly traversed beyond the limits of the power conferred by the Constitution. 28. While the State Legislature is competent to legislate in so far election to Municipality is concerned, which is traceable to Entry 5 of List II of the VIIth Schedule, nonetheless, while enacting the law the State Legislature has clearly exceeded and transgressed the constitutional mandate. 29. Supreme Court in DTC v. Mazdoor Congress, (1991) Suppl (1) SCC 600 held that the doctrine of reading down or of recasting the statute can be applied in limited situations. It is essentially used, firstly, for saving a statute from being struck down on account of its unconstitutionality. It is an extension of the principle that when two interpretations are possible – one rendering it constitutional and other making it unconstitutional, the former should be preferred. The unconstitutionality may spring from either the competence of the Legislature to enact the statute or from its violation of any provisions of the Constitution. The second situation which summons its aid is where the provisions of the statute are vague and ambiguous and it is possible to gather the intentions of the legislature from the object of the statute, the context in which the provision occurs and the purpose for which it is made. However, when the provision is cast in a definite and unambiguous language and its intention is clear, it is not permissible either to mend or bend it even if such recasting is in accord with good reason and conscience. In such circumstances, it is not possible for the Court to remake the statute. 30. In Subramanian Swamy v. Raju, (2014) 8 SCC 390 , Supreme Court clarified that reading down the provisions of a statute cannot be resorted to when the meaning thereof is plain and unambiguous and the legislative intent is clear. Thereafter, the Supreme Court summarized the fundamental principle of the reading down doctrine. As per the principle, the Courts must read the legislation literarily in the first instance. Thereafter, the Supreme Court summarized the fundamental principle of the reading down doctrine. As per the principle, the Courts must read the legislation literarily in the first instance. If on such a reading and understanding the vice of unconstitutionality is attracted, the Courts must explore whether there has been an unintended legislative omission. If such an intendment can reasonably be implied without undertaking what, unmistakably, would be a legislative exercise, the Act may be read down to save it from unconstitutionality. This is a well established and well accepted principle of interpretation which has been reiterated by the Supreme Court time and again. 31. Again, in Cellular Operators Association of India v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, (2016) 7 SCC 703 , Supreme Court reiterated that the doctrine of reading down would apply only when general words used in a statute or in a regulation can be confined in a particular manner so as not to infringe a constitutional right. 32. This principle has been re-stated in Union of India v. Pfizer Limited, (2018) 2 SCC 39 . Again in Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF) v. Union of India, AIR 2020 SC 1363 , Supreme Court once again emphasized that where the provisions of a statute are vague and ambiguous and it is possible to gather the intention of the legislature from the object of the statute, the context in which the provision occur, and the purpose for which it is made, the doctrine of reading down can be applied. Finally, in Union of India v. VKC Footsteps India Private Limited, (2022) 2 SCC 603 , Supreme Court once again dealt with the doctrine of reading down of a statutory provision, but in the facts of that case refrained from applying the aforesaid doctrine as the Supreme Court took the view that doing so would amount to replacing the wisdom of the legislature or its delegate with that of the Court, which is impermissible. 33. Adverting to the present case, it is evident from a reading of Article 243R of the Constitution that the State Legislature has the mandate to enact a law to give effect to the aforesaid provision by limiting the same to the areas mentioned in the constitutional provision. 33. Adverting to the present case, it is evident from a reading of Article 243R of the Constitution that the State Legislature has the mandate to enact a law to give effect to the aforesaid provision by limiting the same to the areas mentioned in the constitutional provision. The 2019 Act is an Act to consolidate and provide for the constitution of municipalities other than Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation in the State of Telangana in terms of Part IX-A of the Constitution. Therefore, it is an Act to give effect to the provisions of Part IX-A of the Constitution. Exercising power under Article 243R (2) of the Constitution, Section 5 (3) and Section 20 of the 2019 Act have been enacted. But, as we have discussed above, the above provisions have clearly transgressed the limit set out by Article 243R. Therefore, to align Sections 5 (3) and 20 of the 2019 Act with the constitutional scheme, the same would have to be read down to mean only those persons can be co-opted as members of the Municipality, as ex officio members, who fulfill the requirement of Clause (2) (a) of Article 243R of the Constitution. 34. Therefore, to save sub-section (3) of Section 5 and Section 20 of 2019 Act from the vice of unconstitutionality, it must be read down, interpreted and understood in the above manner. 35. If that be the position, only the following persons can become or can be co-opted as ex officio members of the Municipality : 1. Persons having special knowledge or experience in municipal administration (however, such a person shall not have the right to vote). 2. Lok Sabha MP and MLA belonging to the State i.e., the State of Telangana and representing the constituencies which comprise wholly or partly the Municipal Area of the Municipality. 3. Rajya Sabha MP and MLC of the State of Telangana but registered as a voter/elector within the Municipal Area of the Municipality. 4. Chairpersons of the Committees constituted under Clause (5) of Article 243S of the Constitution read with Section 5 (3) (c) of the 2019 Act, provided he is registered as a voter/elector within the Municipal Area of the Municipality. 36. Any member who does not fulfill the above criteria would not be entitled to be a member of the Municipality and consequently would not be entitled to vote in the election of the Municipality. 36. Any member who does not fulfill the above criteria would not be entitled to be a member of the Municipality and consequently would not be entitled to vote in the election of the Municipality. If such person was nominated as a member or has cast his/her vote, the same would be null and void. 37. Since the petitioners have already filed election petitions being O.P. No.116 of 2020 and O.P. Nos.121 to 124 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Rangareddy District being the Election Tribunal, we would not like to enter into the specific grievance of the petitioners which is pending before the Election Tribunal. However, while deciding the election case, the Election Tribunal shall apply Section 5 (3) and Section 20 of the 2019 Act in the manner in which the said provisions have been interpreted by this Court in the present judgment. Election Tribunal shall decide the above pending election petitions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the interregnum, respondent Nos.5 and 6 shall not take any major decision having financial implications in respect of Tukkuguda Municipality. 38. Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. However, there shall be no order as to costs.