Delhi High Court: Stayed MCD Mayor’s Notice For Re-Election To Standing Committee

The Delhi High Court in the case Kamaljeet Sehrawat v. Office Of Lieutenant Governor Of Delhi And Ors observed and has stayed the newly-elected Mayor Shelly Oberoi’s notice for re-election of the six members of standing committee of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD).
The bench of Justice Gaurang Kanth in the case bserved that prima facie the returning officer or Mayor is conducting re-elections wherein the court declared the results of elections conducted on February 24 which being in violation of Regulation 51 of the New Delhi Municipal Council (the Procedure and Conduct of Business) Regulations, 1997.
The court stated that as per the Regulation 51, it is nowhere being reflected that the returning officer or mayor has the authority to declare an election of standing committee as null and void. The same is not being mention out of the place that admittedly, the counting of votes and further duty casted upon mayor as in declaring the result of elections held on February 24 shall be culminate into the final result.
Adding to it, the court stated that there being no purpose of conducting a fresh election on February 27.
In the present case, the court also issued a notice on two pleas moved by BJP leaders Kamaljeet Sehrawat and Shikha Roy challenging the notice issued by Mayor on February 24.
The counsel appearing for the petitioner also submitted before the court that the Mayor conducted the elections for six members of the standing committee on February 24. The court without delaying the result issued notice on the same day for re-elections.
The court placed reliance on Regulation 51 which details the procedure prescribed for conducting elections of standing-committee members.
It has also been argued before the court that Mayor had no other alternative but to declare the elections held on February 24 as null and void.
Accordingly, the court granted two weeks for the respondents to file a counter affidavit, while the court put a stay on the impugned notice.
The counsel, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani appeared for the petitioners.
The counsels, Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan and Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra represented the respondents.