![[Telangana Municipalities Act] No Inconsistencies Between 1965 & 2019 Acts: High Court Upholds No-Confidence Motion Against Municipality Chairpersons/Vice-Chairpersons](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2022/06/09/421329-implementation-of-the-comprehensive-crop-insurance-scheme-telangana-high-court-notified-the-governing-bodies-in-a-public-interest-litigation.jpg)
[Telangana Municipalities Act] No Inconsistencies Between 1965 & 2019 Acts: High Court Upholds No-Confidence Motion Against Municipality Chairpersons/Vice-Chairpersons
Live LawThe Telangana High Court has held that even though the Telangana Municipalities Act 2019, which replaced the 1965 Act, omitted some provisions on procedure, its legislative intent was self-evident in the creation of a provision providing for a no-confidence motion under Section 299, which, in the absence of contrary legislative intent cannot be labelled a statutory inconsistency between the two Acts. They contended that the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 does not stipulate a procedure for conducting a no-confidence motion, and in the absence of an established procedure, the motions for no-confidence could not be accepted The order was passed by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti in an appeal filed challenging the order passed by a single judge. The bench affirmed the order upholding the no-confidence motions passed against the petitioners with the observation that even though the statute may be silent regarding the procedure, Section 299 of the 2019 Act also refers to the Telangana Municipalities Rules, 2008 framed under the 1965 Act; which provide for a procedure and clear out any inconsistencies. Mere omission of some of the statutory provisions, in the absence of any contrary legislative intention, cannot be held to be an inconsistency between two statutory provisions no provision in the 2019 act and no rules providing for consideration of no confidence motions.” The main contention raised by the Senior Counsels appearing on behalf of the appellants was that legislative silence cannot be accepted on par with inconsistency and in the absence of a mechanism to deal with a proposed motion for no-confidence, the motion cannot be passed.
History of this topic
Plea in Telangana HC asks for SIT probe into Gandipet land
Deccan Chronicle
TS HC Dismisses Appeal Against No-Trust Moves in Civic Bodies
Deccan Chronicle
HC finds fault with principal secretary for terminating Addl Public Prosecutor
Deccan Chronicle
TS HC dismisses petitions of no-trust motion against municipal chairpersons
Deccan ChronicleDiscover Related
)
