The Allahabad High Court on Friday dismissed two petitions challenging the state government’s decision to merge some village assemblies of Nagar Panchayat Jhunsi and Bahadurpur blocks in the Municipal Corporation, Prayagraj.
The division bench of Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Justice Piyush Aggarwal passed this order while hearing a writ petition filed by Nagar Panchayat Jhunsi, Prayagraj and others.
The petitioners, include Nagar Panchayat Jhunsi and All India Panchayat Parishad, a registered society, which claims to have branches across India and the district president of Prayagraj, who also claims himself to be the elected Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Tendui, Block- Bahadurpur, Tehsil- Phulpur, Prayagraj.
They challenged the notification dated December 31, 2019, including certain villages/gram panchayats of Bahadurpur block into Nagar Nigam Prayagraj.
The petitioner’s senior counsel, while placing the provisions of UP Municipal Corporation Act, 1959, submitted that in the entire scheme, no power is conferred on the commissioner but for clause (56) of Section 2 which has no relevance to the present case.
It is submitted that the recommendation of the commissioner for the merger of Nagar Panchayat, Jhunsi in Nagar Nigam Prayagraj is dehors the law rendering the notification in question invalid.
R.K. Ojha, senior counsel, also submitted that given the constitutional framework, post 74th amendment, a gram panchayat cannot straight away be merged with a larger urban area called the municipal corporation.
It was also contended that with above merger the inhabitants of the gram panchayat, recipients of various social benefit schemes of government would be deprived of their rights to receive benefits and that too without any notice.
Also Read: Delhi HC dismisses appeal against maintenance awarded to elderly mother
On behalf of the state government and the municipal corporation, senior advocates Anoop Trivedi and Vibhu Rai opposed the petitions.
The petitioner said that the commissioner did not have the right to recommend the merger of panchayats with the municipal corporation. Proposal should go to the nagar panchayat board and the objections of the people should be considered before the order. The term of the nagar panchayat president is five years, which cannot be reduced.
Senior Advocate Anoop Trivedi said the commissioner is the representative of the government. There is no flaw in the recommendation and is according to the standard. There is no bar on the combination in the constitution of any panchayat.
The state government, while issuing the notification, has taken a conscious decision on the parameters prescribed in the government order dated April 3, 2018 to include the respective area of gram panchayat/ nagar panchayat into Nagar Nigam Prayagraj and there being no provision either in the Constitution and in particular in Article 243Q or in the Act of 1959 to put either the inhabitants or the representatives of the merging local bodies to notice, the logical inference is that it was a case of causus omissus.
“The Courts are prohibited from filling the gaps in a statute where the omission appears to be deliberate and the omission does not lead to any anomaly or absurdity as it would amount to legislation, which is not intended. Thus, in the light of above interpretative process absence of opportunity to the residents /representatives of the merging body prior to merger of an area into municipal corporation was a deliberate omission in the Act of 1959, as it was open for the State Government while enacting the Act of 1959 to have taken note of the provisions of an earlier law in Section 4 of the Act of 1916 for prior notice,”
-the Court said.
The Court said Jhunsi is on the National Highway. There are several educational institutions including HRI. There are colonies of housing development authority and Prayagraj Development Authority. There are colleges affiliated with the University of Allahabad. In such a situation, there is no legal flaw in the inclusion of Jhunsi in the Municipal Corporation Prayagraj.
“We in the ultimate analysis are of the considered view that none of the pleas raised by the petitioners has any force, petitions are devoid of merit, hence, liable to be dismissed,”
-the Court observed.