Municipal Bodies Not Complying With Statutory Laws, State Must Evolve Mechanism To Monitor Their Functioning: Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan High Court expressed astonishment over the fact that out of 282 Municipal Councils/Boards, several were not following the mandatory requirement of conducting 6 meetings per year as required under Section 51 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (“the Act”), without any action being taken against the defaulters by the State.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand issued a mandamus, directing the Chief Secretary and Principle Secretary, Department of Local Bodies, to constitute supervisory committee of Senior IAS officers at every division headquarters to monitor the functioning of all Municipal Council/Board falling under their jurisdiction.

The Court was hearing a petition filed by a chairperson of Municipal Council, Dausa (“petitioner”) challenging the order of suspension and issuance of charge sheet against her.

Complaints were received against the petitioner alleging several irregularities including misusing crores of rupees, issuing pattas to family members, affixing sign boards with father-in-law's name on premises constructed by the Council, etc.

One of the allegations were that the mandatory requirement of conducting 6 Council meetings in a year was not fulfilled.

In relation to this charge, it was argued by the petitioner that such requirement was not fulfilled by many other Municipal Councils/Boards but no action was taken by the State against the chairpersons of such Councils.

On the contrary, it was argued by the State that firstly, there was no mechanism available with the State to oversee the compliance of this mandate, and that it was the business of the concerned Municipal Council/Board to comply with the provisions of law.

Secondly, it was submitted that even otherwise, whenever complaints were received by the State alleging non-compliance with this provision, actions were taken against concerned personnel.

After hearing the contentions, the Court rejected the arguments put forth by both the Parties in relation to this allegation.

It was opined that the petitioner could not seek any relief based on negative parity, by claiming that no action was taken against other defaulting chairpersons who were not complying with this provision of law.

“Because the members of the Municipal Council/Board are elected by the people for their welfare, hence, such elected representatives of the people are supposed to discharge their duties and functions, as per the provisions contained under the Act of 2009 by calling and attending the general meetings in the interest of public, who has elected them as their representative.”

Similarly, it was stated that the State could not remain a passive observer or justify its inaction by claiming that the responsibility lied only on the concerned Municipal Council/Board and that such meetings were not monitored by the State-level administrative department.

“If the State lacks a mechanism to monitor and supervise the functioning of its Municipal Council/Board it must establish one. A High-Powered Committee should be constituted at the Division level to oversee the activities of each Municipal Council/Board lying within its jurisdiction and ensure compliance of the mandatory legal provisions.”

In this background, the Court issued the above-mentioned mandamus as well as the directions to the Chief Secretary and the Principal Secretary, Department of Local Bodies, to constitute the monitoring and supervisory committee, and to submit a report about the steps taken.

On the petition, the Court did not find any merit to interfere, and accordingly, it was dismissed.

Title: Mamta Choudhary v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 153

Click Here To Read/Download Order