Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 363 (JHR)

Navyuvak Sangh Samiti v. State of Jharkhand

2023-03-20

ANANDA SEN, SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA

body2023
JUDGMENT : 1. By filing this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: (i) For issuance of appropriate writ, orders, directions, commanding upon the respondents to exclude 26 villages from Dhanbad Municipal Corporation and make them independent revenue villages/panchayat, as the economy of these villages are mostly dependant on agriculture and the farmers are deprived of several central and state sponsored schemes by virtue of being included under Dhanbad Municipal Corporation. (ii) For issuance of appropriate writ, orders, directions to stay the election of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation which is due since the term of previously elected members have already been expired, till the final outcome of the present case. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that 26 villages have been included within the territory of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation, which is absolutely bad. The said inclusion is against the provisions of the Constitution and the Jharkhand Municipal Act, since the area, which has been included within the municipal limits of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation is rural area and majority of the population are cultivators and agriculturists. The aforesaid villages should now be taken out from the limits of the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation and be made independent Revenue Villages. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the villagers of the said area are put to prejudice as they will be deprived of subsidies, agricultural loan and further they will also be burdened with tax under Municipal Law. 3. Counsel appearing for the State-respondents submits that as per the provisions of the Constitution and after following all the provisions, these villages were included within the municipal limits of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation. He submits that the notification by which these villages were included is not under challenge, and after more than 10 years the petitioner has approached this Court. 4. After hearing the parties and after going through the writ petition, which is in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, we find that 26 villages, which the petitioner is seeking to exclude from the municipal limits of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation became a part of the municipal area of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation much prior to 2011. The action of inclusion of these villages were not challenged by any person nor even the petitioner. After more than 10 (ten) years, they are approaching this Court, questioning the inclusion of these villages within the territory of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation. 5. The action of inclusion of these villages were not challenged by any person nor even the petitioner. After more than 10 (ten) years, they are approaching this Court, questioning the inclusion of these villages within the territory of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation. 5. Further, the grounds, which the petitioners have resorted to, for excluding these 26 villages from the municipal limits of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation and to make them independent revenue villages is that these villages are pre-dominantly agricultural areas thus, these villages should not be brought within the limits of Municipal Corporation as bringing those villages within the municipal limits will deprive the people of those villages from getting the benefits of Central and State Government Schemes. It was the case of the petitioner that since the activities in those villages are agricultural, those villages should not have been made to constitute part of municipal area. 6. Section 3 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 provides for declaration to constitute municipal area. As per Section 3(1), several factors are considered for including an area within the municipal limits. Nonagricultural activity is only one of such considerations. The considerations are the population of the area, density of population, economic importance of the area, market facilities, potentialities to attract industries or commerce or education, health care or other such infrastructure for economic and industrial growth are also necessary and important considerations. Involvement of percentage of population in agricultural activity, by itself, is not sufficient to exclude the areas from the municipal precincts. It is necessary to quote Section 3(1) of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011, which reads as under: 3. Declaration of intention to constitute a municipal area: (1) The State Government may, after making such inquiry as it may deem fit, and having regard to the population of any local area, density of population, the percentage of employment in non-agriculture activities in such area, the economic importance of such area, and such other factors as may be prescribed, by notification, declare its intention to specify such area to be a larger urban area, or a smaller urban area, or a transitional area; Provided that local area having acquired urban characteristics and importance such as availability of market facilities, established industries or potentialities to attract industries or commerce or education, health care or other such infrastructures for economic and industrial growth may also be considered. 7. 7. After the declaration is made, said declaration has to be published under Section 4 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011. In terms of Section 6 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011, after considering the objections, the municipality has to be constituted. 8. Further, as per Section 9 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011, it is the State Government, who has the power to abolish or alter the municipal limits of the area. Section 9(2) of the Act gives powers to the State Government to exclude from a municipal area any local area comprising therein and defined in the notification. Section 9(2) of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 reads as under: 9. Power to abolish or alter limits of municipal area - The State Government may, by notification: (1)......... (2) exclude from a municipal area any local area comprised therein and defined in the notification. 9. Further, Section 14 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act gives powers to the Government to review existing municipalities, wherever they consider necessary and upgrade and reorganize them. Section 14(1) of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 reads as under: 14. Review by the Government after publication of census report: (1) The State Government shall undertake a review of the existing municipalities wherever they consider necessary and upgrade or reorganize them, having regard to the peri-urban areas and the out growths of the existing Municipal Corporation, Municipal Council and Nagar Panchayat, as the case may be within one year after taking into consideration the Census report published by the Government of India. 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tulsipur Sugar Co. Ltd. vs. The Notified Area Committee, Tulsipur, (1980) 2 SCC 295 , has held that the power to declare Municipal Board or a Municipality is a legislative function which is discharged by the State by issuing a notification on behalf of the Hon’ble Governor. The notification issued by the Hon’ble Governor is in fact a notification issued by the State Government. The Supreme Court has further held that the power of the State Government to make a declaration under Section 3 of the Act is legislative in character because the application of the rest of the provisions of the Act to the geographical area which is declared as a town area is dependent upon such declaration. Section 3 of the Act is in the nature of a conditional legislation. 11. Section 3 of the Act is in the nature of a conditional legislation. 11. In the instant writ petition, there is no pleading to suggest that procedures were not followed while including those 26 villages within the precincts of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation, rather it is not also the case of the petitioner that the procedures were not followed. Their only contention is that the residents of the area are predominantly engaged in agricultural activities. 12. When all the procedures have been followed and those 26 villages were included in the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation by publication of a notification and when, admittedly the said notification is not challenged, the prayer made in this writ petition, which is by way of Public Interest Litigation, cannot be entertained. 13. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost.