HC allows mayor to file consolidated reply to plea against re-election of members of MCD standing committee

On February 25, the high court had stayed re-election of six members of the standing committee of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) which was scheduled for February 27, saying the mayor prima facie acted beyond her powers in ordering a fresh poll.

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday permitted the city mayor to file a "consolidated reply" to a challenge to the re-election of six members of the MCD standing committee. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav granted three days' time to mayor Shelly Oberoi, also the returning officer (RO), to file her stand after the senior counsel representing her sought "withdrawal" of the already filed reply in the matter.

Counsel for the petitioners, MCD councillors Kamaljeet Sehrawat and Shikha Roy who moved the high court earlier this year against the re-election ordered by Oberoi, opposed the request, saying it was an attempt to stall the formation of the standing committee which is very important for the proper functioning of the MCD.

On February 25, the high court had stayed re-election of six members of the standing committee of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) which was scheduled for February 27, saying the mayor prima facie acted beyond her powers in ordering a fresh poll. The judge, however, observed that at present, he was only considering the request for some time, and said, "Three days' time is granted to respondent no 4 (mayor) to file a consolidated reply".

The court also permitted the petitioners to respond to the fresh reply to be filed by the mayor and listed the case for hearing on May 3. Senior advocate Rahul Mehra, appearing for the mayor, said he wanted to file a consolidated reply in view of certain developments which happened after the filing of the initial reply. Mehra also objected to the filing of a "compliance affidavit" in relation to preservation of ballot papers, ballot boxes etc. by "respondent no 4" through another lawyer, saying he does not have authority to represent that party i.e. the mayor as he has appeared in the matter on behalf of respondent no 3 i.e. MCD.

The lawyer, advocate Ajay Digpaul said, he was appearing on instructions from the MCD and the affidavit is duly signed by the Municipal Secretary. The court said the compliance affidavit will be deemed to have been filed by the respondent number 3 (MCD). The mayor had on February 24 announced fresh polling for electing six members of the MCD standing committee on February 27 at 11 am amid clashes between the councillors of the BJP and the AAP in the municipal House.

The MCD House had witnessed ruckus on February 22 as well with members of the BJP and the AAP exchanging blows and hurling plastic bottles at each other. The House was again rocked by clashes after fresh elections were held on February 24, and mayor Oberoi subsequently alleged that a few members of the saffron party made a life-threatening attack on her.

The petitioners have contended in the high court that the mayor ordered a fresh election for February 27 without declaring the result of the poll held on February 24 in violation of regulation 51 of Delhi Municipal Corporation (Procedure & Conduct of Business) Regulations, which contains the prescribed procedure.

Roy's petition, filed through advocate Neeraj, said the poll was conducted in a peaceful manner and there was no occasion for the mayor to recall the elections. The high court had issued a notice to the RO, the Delhi government, Lieutenant Governor and MCD on the two pleas while observing that prima facie the decision to hold a re-election in the present case was in violation of the regulation.

The high court had said governing norms do not reflect the mayor has the authority to declare the earlier election null and void and conduct the re-election without announcing the results of the previous poll held on February 24. It had said prima facie the mayor's action was in violation of the applicable regulations.

The counsel for the mayor had told the court that she had no other option but to declare the earlier poll as null and void as the process was vitiated due to the unruly behaviour of members. The lawyer had also alleged the mayor did not get adequate cooperation from the member secretary and technical experts. (PTI)