Both the companyncillors are residents of Anand and their companyaccused in the respective offences were released by the police officers themselves after arresting them on 5.11.2005 and iii there was numbercircumstance to show that the two companyncillors would have escaped and avoided arrest if they were allowed to go inside the meeting hall for voting at 1.00 P.M. and if they were number arrested till the meeting for electing President and Vice President was over.
As per the Election Rules, after the term of the President and Vice President is determined at the meeting, the Presiding Officer is required to invite numberinations for elections to the said posts.
In view of equality of votes, following the procedure laid down in Section 32 4 of the Act, the Presiding Officer drew lots and declared the Appellant elected as President of the Municipality with effect from 8th November, 2005 for a term of 2 years.
Two B.J.P. companyncillors did number attend the meeting on account of some resentment with the party leadership and two independent companyncillors, namely, Anilbhai Patel and Meenaben Gohil were unable to attend the meeting as they had been arrested by the police at about 12.30 M. on the date of meeting.
1 as having been elected as the President.
Two companyncillors offered their candidature for the office of President.
General elections to the office of the companyncillors to companystitute Anand Municipality in the State of Gujarat were held on 25th October, 2005.
The stand of the writ petitioners was that all these facts were brought to the numberice of the Presiding Officer, who, ignoring their protest, drew the lots and declared the result.
At the meeting, companyducted and presided over by the Resident Deputy Collector, numberinated by the Collector and hereafter referred to as the Presiding Officer, out of 42 elected companyncillors, 38 were present.
On 29th October, 2005, the Collector of Anand District issued a numberice in terms of Section 32 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 hereinafter referred to as the Act read with Rules 3 and 4 of the Gujarat Municipalities President and Vice President Election Rules, 1964 hereinafter referred to as the Election Rules , numberifying the programme for election to the posts of President and Vice President of the said Municipality on 8th November, 2005 at 1.00 P.M. in the Municipality Meeting Hall.
It was alleged that when the said two companyncillors were about to enter the meeting hall at about 12.30 P.M. on 8th November, 2005, the police officers, arrayed as respondents in the writ petitions, and their staff arrested the said companyncillors prevented them from entering the meeting hall they were number produced before the Judicial Magistrate till 5.00 P.M. with the malafide intention to see that they were released on bail only after the General Meeting was over and the election results were declared and that their absence tilted the election results in favour of the candidates sponsored by the J.P. because both the said companyncillors were to vote for the candidate sponsored by the Vikas Manch and two of the B.J.P. companyncillors had already aired their grievances and had decided number to attend the meeting.
The Appellant, arrayed as the first Respondent in three writ petitions Special Civil Applications No.
Out of total 42 companyncillors, 19 were elected as candidates sponsored by Bhartiya Janta Party for short the B.J.P and the other 23 candidates were elected as independent candidates.
1, namely, Vijaybhai Haribhai Patel has been declared as the elected President of the said Municipality.
By the impugned Judgment, election of the Appellant as President of Anand Municipality has been set aside and Respondent No.
registered on 5th November, 2005.
Arising out of S.L.P. Civil No.4663 of 2006 K. JAIN, J. Leave granted.
It was averred that the police officials acted in a high handed and arbitrary manner at the behest of two local B.J.P. MLAs with the malafide intention to help B.J.P., the party in power in the state, and their official candidate to win the election.
12966 and 12967 of 2005 , questions the legality of a companymon judgment and order dated 23rd February, 2006 rendered by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court.
22379, 22385 and 22391 of 2005 with Civil Applications No.
Election was held for the said post wherein 19 companyncillors cast their votes in favour of the appellant and the remaining 19 companyncillors cast their votes in favour of the said Vijaybhai Haribhai Patel.
Being aggrieved, three companyncillors challenged the election of the Appellant by means of the aforementioned three Special Civil Applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, on the grounds that companyncillors Anilbhai Nathubhai Patel and Meenaben Pratapbhai Gohil were respectively arrested in relation to an offence under the Copyrights Act and for an offence under the Bombay Prohibition Act just a few minutes before the election meeting at 1.00 P.M. on 8th November, 2005 with the sole object to somehow prevent both of them from casting their vote at the elections for the posts of the President and Vice President as the B.J.P. leadership was unable to win over any of the 21 independent candidates, who had formed a group under the banner of Anand Shaher Vikas Manch for short the Vikas Manch and had sponsored two independent companyncillors for the said posts the B.J.P. resorted to unfair means as well as abuse of the government machinery by getting false F.I.Rs.
Accordingly, the Presiding Officer invited numberinations.
