Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.37 seconds)Section 51 in The Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 338 in The Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 104 in The Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Kerala Samsthana Chethu Thozhilali ... vs State Of Kerala & Ors on 24 March, 2006
18. The impugned amendment to the delegated legislation is made in
exercise of rule making power. Such exercise of power has been done in
conformity with the provisions of the Act. The power to make rules under
Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 355 of the Act includes all powers
which would enable making of rules generally for the purpose of carrying
into effect the provisions of the Act and also, in particular, enumerated
14
matters falling under Sub-section (2) of Section 355 of the Act. The
powers under that Section are in addition to any power specifically
conferred by the Act. Section 338 (2) of the Act provides rule making
power relating to execution of works. With such rule making power being
available, the reference made on behalf of the Petitioners to decision in
Kerala Samsthana Chethu Thozhilali Union Vs. State of Kerala and
Others, (2006) 4 SCC 327, does not appeal to us in the context of the
case in hand.
Global Energy Ltd. & Anr vs Central Electricity Regulatory Com on 11 May, 2009
Similar is the situation regarding the decisions in Global
Energy Limited and Another Vs. Central electricity Regulatory
Commission, (2009) 15 SCC 570 and Union of India and Others Vs. S.
Srinivasan, (2012) 7 SCC 683.
Vipulbhai M. Chaudhary. vs Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing ... on 19 April, 2016
20. The authority of the Municipal Council / Nagar Panchayat and the
Presidents in terms of Part IXA of the Constitution is also not infringed in
any manner by the impugned amendment. Nothing in the Act or in the
Rules as they originally stood before the amendment, is established by
the Petitioners as inconsistent with provisions of Part IXA of the
Constitution. Obviously, therefore, the provisions in the Act and the Rules
15
which continued to run with full vigor in terms of Article 243ZF of the
Constitution, carrying with it the clear distinction between the policy
decisions in economic and financial matters and executive action in
relation to the financial administration of the municipalities. The provisions
of the Act and the Rules including the impugned amendment do not
contradict the provisions of Part IXA. It does not impinge the democratic
principles which govern functioning of Municipalities as democratic units
as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Vipulbhai M. Chaudhary
Vs. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited, 2015
AIR SCW 2130. The impugned amendment only paves way to the Chief
Municipal Officer being empowered to pass every bill or voucher without
any monetary limit; and also giving authority to the Chief Municipal Officer
and Accounts Officer / Accountant to sign the cheques and E-payments.
That does not in any manner impair the authority of the President or the
Municipal Council / Nagar Panchayat of the decision making power of
those authorities in relation to policy matters touching finances and
financial administration of the Municipal Council / Nagar Panchayat. We
also do not see any statutory provision under the Act or the Rules which
provides exclusive power to the President to cloth that authority the power
to pass bills and issue payment orders.