Mukundrao Ragho Bhamre & Ors. v. Satana Municipal Council & Ors.

Judgment

1. By petition, petitioner impugned Resolution passed Municipal Council 5-7-1999. The petitioner a remedy challenging execution Resolution itself section Municipalities Act. However petitioner chosen a petition exercising jurisdiction court. At 308 petition hearing, a querry alternate remedy section 308 availed petitioner. Several judgments pointing objection alternate remedy (2) raised admission substantial period during pendency, courts should require petitioner alternate remedy. Judgments were also cited stating that alternate remedy is not a bar in every case.

2. The purpose prudence Supreme Court India 1954 regarding observance alternate remedy approaching Court 226 principles logic. Article The alternate remedy Article 226 statutory remedy remedies should followed failure relief thereunder Court approached Article 226 vice-versa rule. The High Court therefore insisting a litigant approach statutory authority remedy available before requiring exercise jurisdiction Article

226. The present example a remedy statutory appeal is better and efficacious than that available in writ jurisdiction.

3. On 1-4-1997 Government of Maharashtra issued Notification redressing schedule tarrif contemplated section 108(f) 323 a Municipalities Act. On 9-9-1998 Muncipal Council (3) passed a Resolution saying necessary bye-laws, supply requirement section 108(f). By Resolution 14-10-1998 consideration postponed Resolutionn 9-9-1998 meritted within months. Thereafter matter 23rd March 1999 Resolution implement amendment passed. The communication requiring implementation Resolution received. On 5-7-1999 amendments accepted. It Resolution 5-7-1999 accepts amendment,

challenged before petition, illegal directly contending Resolution non-observance conditions mentioned section 108(f) sections 323 323 Municipalities Act, hence the same is liable to be struck down.

4. Section 308 (1) of the Municipalities Act reads thus: "If, opinion Collector, execution Council, resolution anything a behalf a Council, causing likely injury annoyance public (4) against public interest a breach unlawful, writing signature suspend execusion prohibit thereof.

5. The Collector consider Resolution a council unlawful, writing prohibit implementation thereof. In present therefore citizens Satana Municipal Council a direction prohibiting municipal council giving effect Resolution 5-7-1999 violates requirement section 108 (f) 322 323 Municipalities Act. It a petitioner Resolution illegal violation so. provition. There nothing language section Reliance 108 prohibit Collector placed a direction Collector issued earlier, whereby Collector required municipality effect amendment a condition precedent, granting budget municipality concerned. Assuming direction, threatening municipality something cannot stretch imagination, a amendment something illegal. There nothing preventing petitioner approaching Collector section 308, (5) Resolution 5-7-1999 violative provisions, liable struck implementation prohibited. It purpose that alternate remedy is created and tried to be insisted upon by the court.

6. In petitioner position reserving proceedings section 308, petition dismissed. In application section 308 petitioner, Collector decide accordance merits objection limitation factually section 308 limitation. This competent directions judgment Supreme Court in (1996) VI SCC page 199. Petition accordingly dismissed.

7. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.