Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the disqualification under Section 13A(1)(c) of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, as amended, had to be computed from the commencement of Haryana Act No. 3 of 1994 or from the date of the later amending Act No. 15 of 1994.
Analysis: The disqualification provision made a person with more than two living children ineligible for membership of a municipality, while the proviso deferred its operation for those having more than two children until the expiry of one year from the commencement of the Act. The later amendment merely substituted the word used in the proviso and did not create a fresh starting point for calculating the one-year period. Reading the provision as a whole, the legislative intention was clear that the one-year grace period ran from the commencement of Haryana Act No. 3 of 1994. A purposive construction was necessary to avoid inconsistency with the main provision and to give effect to the object of the legislation.
Conclusion: The disqualification attached from the expiry of one year from the commencement of Haryana Act No. 3 of 1994, and the nomination was rightly rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a later amendment only substitutes a word in a proviso, the period fixed by the original commencement clause continues to govern, and the provision must be construed purposively to advance the legislative object.