Model Code Of Conduct Need Not Interfere With Ongoing Statutory Activity Administering Provisions & Schemes: Bombay HC
|The Bombay High Court clarified that there is nothing in the Model Code of Conduct that would interfere with conduct of ongoing statutory activity administering the provisions of the Statute and schemes made thereunder.
The Court was dealing with a Writ Petition filed by Maharashtra Rajya Bandhkam Kamgar Sanyukt Kriti Samiti against a Circular issued by the Maharashtra Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Board.
A Division Bench of Justice Arif S. Doctor and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan enunciated, “Upon a careful consideration of the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct applicable to the conduct of elections, the Scheme of the Act and the Impugned Circular, we are left in no manner of doubt that there is nothing in the Model Code of Conduct that would interfere with conduct of ongoing statutory activity administering the provisions of the Act and the schemes made thereunder. Likewise, there is nothing in the Act and the schemes made thereunder that would render continued implementation of pre-existing benefits under pre-existing schemes and that too consistent with past practice as existing before commencement of the Model Code of Conduct that would be violative in letter or spirit.”
The Bench added that impugned Circular, inasmuch as it seeks to suspend registration of workers as beneficiaries and renewal of such registration, and the provision of benefits to such beneficiaries under pre-existing terms of pre-existing schemes, consistent with past practice, deserves to be quashed and set aside.
Advocate Sudha Bharadwaj appeared for the Petitioners while Advocate Akshay Shinde appeared for the Respondents.
In this case, the Petition challenged a Circular issued by the Board, suspending the implementation of various activities involving welfare measures administered under the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, on the premise of the implementation of the Model Code of Conduct applicable to the conduct of the forthcoming Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Elections.
The aforesaid Circular issued to various authorities administering the 1996 Act, directed that until receipt of clarification from the Election Commission (EC), fresh registration, renewal of registrations, distribution of benefits such as protective gears, essential gears, household utility sets, grant of fresh approvals under the housing scheme and publicity work of the Board, shall remain suspended until further orders.
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, observed, “In fact, Paragraph II(2) of the Model Code of Conduct, explicitly states that national, regional and state utility schemes, which have already been brought up to the stage of completion and their utilization (when elections are announced) should not be stopped or delayed. Explicitly, it provides that Model Code of Conduct cannot be given as an excuse for not commissioning such schemes or for allowing such schemes to remain idle.”
The Court noted that in view of the right to register being dependent on the mixed question of fact and law as to whether a registered worker has worked for at least 90 days in a year in building and other construction work, annual renewal of registration must necessarily be a continuous and ongoing exercise.
“Such registration and renewal process has to necessarily be administered round the year if the mandate of Parliament has to run its intended course. Consequently, there is no basis to suspend the same on account of the electoral Model Code of Conduct. What would be prohibited under the Model Code of Conduct is the introduction of any new measure in the form of either policy of a revision of size of benefits when the Model Code of Conduct is in force”, it added.
The Court further said that, what would be prohibited is the creation of any fanfare and holding of ceremonies with the involvement of political functionaries and that would be the limited outcome of the implication of the Model Code of Conduct for the administration of the Act.
“Whenever elections are held in the State of Maharashtra, the administration of the Act and the implementation of the schemes as existing when the Model Code of Conduct was made applicable, must necessarily be continued without any suspension in the ordinary course of administration, consistent with past practice and in accordance with benefits stipulated before the Model Code of Conduct is brought into force’, it ordered.
The Court also directed that any publicity and advocacy activity as envisaged in the impugned Circular shall be kept the bare minimum, necessary to implement the schemes made under the Act.
“None of such activity shall entail any ceremony or fanfare or even any association with any political functionaries”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition and quashed the impugned Circular.
Cause Title- Maharashtra Rajya Bandhkam Kamgar Sanyukt Kriti Samiti & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-OS:18264-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate Sudha Bharadwaj
Respondents: AGP Himanshu Takke and Advocate Akshay Shinde.