Thereafter on my directives the Police soon left.
Magistrate Shri Sinha also appealed to restore peace.
My efforts to restore peace and order were futile, and there was serious law and order situation.
Thereafter the Councillors were calmed down and the order was restored.
During this period I even suggested that the Councillors should go out.
From the Judgment and order dated 28.6.1988 of the Bombay High Court in Civil Writ Petition No.
In the meantime the District Magistrate Shri R.R. Sinha and Supdt.
Dr. Y.S. Chitale, V.A. Bobde, V.J. Francis, N.M. Popli and Miss Almjit Chauhan for the Respondents.
N. Kacker, U.R. Lalit, V.D. Joshi, B.D. Joshi, S.C. Bora and Kailash Vasdev for the Petitioner.
Some of the Shiv Sena Councillors were in aggressive mood and they came to my table and violently thumped the table and shouted that they would number allow this meeting to take place.
After this, the Councillors belonging to the opposition group abstained from participating in the meeting held at 4.30 p.m. at which respondents number.
In the circumstances aforesaid there was numberalternative and I felt that it was my duty to seek the Police help and I called the Police to restore order.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Special Leave Petition Civil No.
1 and 2 Dr. Shantaram Kale and Takiqui Hassan were declared elected as Mayor and Deputy Mayor respectively and respondents number.
of Police Shri T.C. Wankhede entered the Hall.
800 of 1988.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN, J. This special leave petition is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay dated June 28, 1988 upholding the election of respondents number.
3 8 as Members of the Standing Committee, each of them having polled 32 votes.
At this stage the situation in the house worsened and in fact there was hot exchange of words and shouting between different groups of Councillors.
Since the question involved was a matter of moment and the affidavits filed by the petitioner Chandrakant Khaire, the leader of the Shiv Sena Party which is the largest single group in the Corporation companysisting of 18 Concillors, and by some of the Councillors as well as their supporters, and the affidavits in opposition filed by the Party in power Congress I which has formed a companylition with the splinter groups companymanding a majority of 32 Councillors in a House of 60, raise companytroverted facts as to whether the proceedings of the meeting had been adjourned sine die or merely suspended, we thought it better to have the minutes of the proceedings before us.
1 and 2 Dr. Shantaram Kale and Takiqui Hassan as Mayor and Deputy Mayor respectively, and respondents number.
1 8 and Shri Vinod Bobde, learned companynsel appearing for respondent number 9, the Municipal Commissioner.
7508 of 1988.
3 8 as Members of the Standing Committee at the first meeting of the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation at the Alankar Hall, held on May 6, 1988 at 2 p.m. The issue involved is whether the first meeting of the Corporation called for that day at 2.45 p.m. by the Municipal Commissioner, respondent number 9, who presided over the meeting, was adjourned for the day or adjourned sine die and therefore had to be called on some subsequent date to be fixed by him and thus necessitated the giving of seven days clear numberice as required by r. 1 h , Chapter II of the Rules framed under s. 453 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949.
Thereafter Shri Man Mohan Singh Oberoi raised the point of order that the meeting should number be adjourned and that he along with another Councillor Dr. Sancheti insisted that meeting should companytinue.
An attempt was made to throw chairs at each other and in fact the furniture in the house was scattered and several Councillors surrounded me and some spoke in favour of adjournment and some spoke in favour of companytinuation.
Thereupon some of the Councillors objected and actually resisted the entry of the Police.
