Bombay High Court
Mohammad Hisham Osmani S/O Mohammad ... vs The Union Of India Ministry Of Home ... on 8 May, 2024
2024:BHC-AS:21355-DB
93.22-PIL+.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 145 OF 2023
BASAVRAJ Shaikh Masud Ismail Shaikh
GURAPPA & Ors. .. Petitioners
PATIL
Digitally signed by
BASAVRAJ Versus
GURAPPA PATIL
Date: 2024.05.08
14:53:01 +0530
The Union of India, Through its
Secretary, Home Affairs
Department & Ors. .. Respondents
Shri Satish B. Talekar a/w Ms. Madhavi Ayyappan, Ms. Kalyani
Mangave i/by Talekar and Associates for Petitioners.
Shri Devang Vyas, Additional Solicitor General a/w Shri Advait
M. Sethna, Shri D. P. Singh, Ms. Niyanta Trivedi, Shri Amit
Munde for Respondent no.1-UoI.
Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, Advocate General with Shri P. P. Kakade,
Government Pleader with Mrs. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP, Ms. N. M.
Mehra, AGP for Respondent-State.
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 148 OF 2023
Mohammed Mushtaq Ahmed
S/o Mohammed Yousuf & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India, Through its
Secretary, Home Affairs
Department & Ors. .. Respondents
Shri Y. H. Muchhala, Senior Advocate a/w Shri Sangheer Khan,
Rashda Ainapore, Amaan Khan, Shri A. H. Ansari i/by Judicare
Law Associates for Petitioners.
Shri Devang Vyas, Additional Solicitor General a/w Shri Advait
M. Sethna, Shri D. P. Singh, Ms. Niyanta Trivedi, Shri Amit
Munde for Respondent no.1-UoI.
Basavraj Page|1
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, Advocate General with Shri P. P. Kakade,
Government Pleader with Mrs. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP, Ms. N. M.
Mehra, AGP for Respondent-State.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 11968 OF 2023
Mohammad Hisham Osmani
s/o Mohammad Yusuf Osmani
& Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs
Department & Ors. .. Respondents
Shri S. S. Kazi a/w M. N. Shaikh for Petitioners.
Shri Devang Vyas, Additional Solicitor General a/w Shri Advait
M. Sethna, Shri Ashutosh Misra, Shri Sandeep Raman for
Respondent-UoI.
Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, Advocate General with Shri P. P. Kakade,
Government Pleader with Mrs. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP, Ms. N. M.
Mehra, AGP for Respondent-State.
RESERVED ON: 4th OCTOBER, 2023.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.12352 OF 2023
Aleemuddin Ziaddin Shaikh
& Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Basavraj Page|2
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12358 OF 2023
Shaikh Sikandar Budhan & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Shri Saeed S. Shaikh with Shri M. M. Chaudhari for Petitioners.
Shri Devang Vyas, Additional Solicitor General with Shri Advaith
Sethna, Shri Rangan Majumdar and Ms. Vaibhavi Chaudhary
i/by Ms. Anusha P. Amin for Respondent no.1-UoI.
Shri P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Ms. R. A. Salunkhe,
AGP for Respondents 2 to 4 - State in WP/12352/2023.
Shri P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Shri M. M. Pabale,
AGP for Respondents 2 to 4 - State in WP/12358/2023.
RESERVED ON: 6th OCTOBER, 2023.
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 93 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1276 OF 2023
Mohammed Mushtaq Ahmed S/o
Mohammed Yousuf & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2672 OF 2023
IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 93 OF 2022
Rajendra Himmatrao Janjal .. Applicant
Basavraj Page|3
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
In the matter between:
Mohammed Mustaq Ahmed S/o
Mohammed Yusuf & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17531 OF 2022
IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 93 OF 2022
Sanjay S/o Kisanrao Kenekar & Ors. .. Applicants
In the matter between:
Mohammed Mustaq Ahmed S/o
Mohammed Yusuf & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3616 OF 2023
Mukund Bhikaji Gadhe & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3607 OF 2023
Inamdar Sayyed Moinoddin & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3294 OF 2023
Shaikh Hussain Patel and Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Basavraj Page|4
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3892 OF 2023
Sayyad Anzaruddin S/o Sayyad
Viquaruddin Quadri & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3881 OF 2023
Aleemuddin Ziauddin Shaikh & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3886 OF 2023
Fiza Mahebub Kazi & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7011 OF 2023
Syed Khalilullah @ Mujahid
Hussaini & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6996 OF 2023
Shaikh Sikandar Budhan & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Basavraj Page|5
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6997 OF 2023
Sarfaraz Yusuf Momin & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6992 OF 2023
Shaikh Mohammed Taha Patel & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 14807 OF 2023
Ainoddin Mahemud Sawar & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6990 OF 2023
Mohsin Khan Aziz Khan & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 173 OF 2022
Shaikh Masud Ismail Shaikh & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Basavraj Page|6
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 110 OF 2022
Khalil S/o Saif Sayyad .. Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1185 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17622 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION STAMP NO. 14913 OF 2023
Mohammad Hisham Osmani S/o
Mohammad Yusuf Osmani & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
RESERVED ON : APRIL 1, 2024
Shri Y. H. Muchhala, Senior Advocate a/w Shri Sagheer A.
Khan, Shri G. D. Shaikh a/w Shri Abdul Hamid Ansari i/by
Judicare Law Associates for Petitioner in PIL/93/2022 with
IA/1276/2023.
Shri S.B. Talekar a/w Ms. Madhavi Ayyappan i/b Talekar and
Associates for Petitioner in PIL/173/2023.
Shri Anil Anturkar, Senior Advocate a/w Shri S. S. Kazi for the
Petitioner in WP/1185/2023.
Shri M. M. Chaudhari i/b. Shri Saeed S. Shaikh for Petitioner in
WP/6996/2023, WP/6992/2023, WP/3607/ 2023, WP/3616
/2023, WP/3892/2023, WP/7011/2023, WP/6990/2023, WP/
3881/2023, WP/6997/2023, WPST/14807/2023 &
WP/3886/2023.
Shri Hassan Khan a/w Shri Ashwin Sawlani for the Petitioner in
WP/3294/2023.
Basavraj Page|7
::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2024 18:28:48 :::
93.22-PIL+.docx
Shri Karim Pathan i/b. Shri Shoyab Shaikh a/w Shri Shane
Pillai for Petitioner in PIL 110/2022.
Shri Devang Vyas, Addl. Solicitor General a/w Mrs. Savita Ganoo
& Shri D. P. Singh for the Respondent No. 1- UOI.
Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, AG a/w Shri P.P. Kakade, Govt. Pleader,
Shri O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. Govt. Pleader a/w Shri Vaibhav
Charulwar, 'B' Panel Counsel a/w Ms. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for the
State.
Shri Pradeep Thorat a/w Ms. Aditi S. Naikare for Respondent No.
4 in PIL/93/2022 (Aurangabad Municipal Corporation).
CORAM: DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. &
ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
PRONOUNCED ON : MAY 8, 2024
JUDGMENT (PER : CHIEF JUSTICE)
(A) PRELUDE :
1. The following quote from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet
resonated throughout the hearing of this batch of writ petitions:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
In these lines Juliet makes a profound observation about
the nature of names and says that a name does not make
something that it is; even if rose had a different name other
Basavraj Page|8
93.22-PIL+.docx
than "rose", the essence of the flower would not change, it
would still be the same. However, the Petitioners disagree with
what Shakespeare says through Juliet in his famous tragedy.
(B) CHALLENGE:
2. By instituting these petitions under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, some of which are Public Interest Litigation
Petitions, the Petitioners assail the validity of Notifications issued
by the Government of Maharashtra changing the name of
Aurangabad and Osmanabad cities to Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv, respectively. Challenge in these
petitions has also been made to the Notifications issued by the
State Government changing the names of revenue areas or units
i.e. revenue Division, District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village
from Aurangabad revenue areas to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
revenue areas and from Osmanabad revenue areas to Dharashiv
revenue areas. The impugned Notification bearing No. Ganab-
2715/Mantri 18/C.R.218/29 dated 24th February 2023, whereby
the name of Aurangabad city has been changed to Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar city, is extracted hereinbelow:
Basavraj Page|9
93.22-PIL+.docx
"GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Madam Cama Marg, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032, dated the 24th February 2023.
NOTIFICATION
No. Ganab-2715/Mantri 18/C.R.218/29.--The Ministry of Home
Affairs, Government of India vide its letter No.11/19/2022-M&G, dated
24th February, 2023, has approved the proposal of the Government of
Maharashtra, for changing the name of City "Aurangabad" to
"Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar". The Government of Maharashtra is
hereby pleased to direct that the name of the City "Aurangabad", Taluka
& District-Aurangabad, Maharashtra State shall be changed as
"Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar" (N«kirh laÒkthuxj), Taluka & District-Aurangabad,
Maharashtra State.
2. The necessary changes shall be carried out in the Government
records of the State by all concerned as shown in the following TABLE :
--
TABLE
Devanagri Devnagri (Hindi) Roman
(Marathi)
CHHATRAPATI
N«kirh laÒkthuxj N«kirh laÒkthuxj SAMBHAJINAGAR
By order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra,
PRAKASH INDALKAR,
Deputy Secretary to Government of Maharashtra."
Basavraj Page|10
93.22-PIL+.docx
The Notification bearing No.Ganab-4721/CR-73/A-29 dated
24th February 2023 changing the name of Osmanabad city to
Dharashiv city is also extracted hereinbelow:
"GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Madam Cama Marg,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032, dated the 24th February 2023.
NOTIFICATION
No. Ganab-4721/CR-73/A/29.--The Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India vide its letter No.11/18/2022-M&G, dated 7th
February, 2023, has approved the proposal of the Government of
Maharashtra, for changing the name of City "Osmanabad" to "Dharashiv".
The Government of Maharashtra is hereby pleased to direct that the name
of the City "Osmanabad", Taluka & District Osmanabad, Maharashtra
State shall be changed as "Dharashiv" (धाराशि व), Taluka & District
Osmanabad, Maharashtra State.
2. The necessary changes shall be carried out in the Government
records of the State by all concerned as shown in the following TABLE
TABLE
Devanagri (Marathi) Devnagri (Hindi) Roman
धाराशि व धाराशि व DHARASHIV
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Maharashtra,
PRAKASH INDALKAR,
Deputy Secretary to Government of Maharashtra"
Basavraj Page|11
93.22-PIL+.docx
We also extract hereinbelow the impugned Notification
No.TLC 2 CR-3 M-1 dated 15th September 2023 whereby the
name of Aurangabad Division, District, Sub Division, Taluka and
Village (all revenue arears or units) has been changed to
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Division, District, Sub Division,
Taluka and Village:
"REVENUE AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT
Mantralaya, Madam Cama Marg, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk,
Mumbai, dated the 15th September, 2023
NOTIFICATION
MAHARASHTRA LAND REVENUE CODE, 1966.
No. TLC 2 CR-3 M- 1 -- In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (vi) of sub-section (4 of section 7 of the Maharashtra Land
Revenue Code, Mah. XLI of and of all other powers enabling it in that
behalf, the Government of Maharashtra after previous publication as
required by sub-section (7 of the said section 7 and having considered
the objections and suggestions thereto, hereby alters the names of the
revenue areas specified in column (# of the Schedule appended
hereunder and renames them as mentioned against each of them in
column (# of the said Schedule.
Schedule
(1) (2)
Aurangabad Division Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Division
Aurangabad District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar District
Aurangabad Sub-Division Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Sub-Division
Aurangabad Taluka Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Taluka
Aurangabad Village Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Village
2. Any reference, in any law, instrument or other document, to
the revenue areas specified in column (1) of the Schedule aforesaid (as
they existed immediately before the publication of this notification in the
Basavraj Page|12
93.22-PIL+.docx
Maharashtra Government Gazette) shall, unless the context requires
otherwise, be deemed to be a reference to the revenue areas as
renamed in column (2) of the said Schedule.
By order and in the name of the
Governor of Maharashtra,
SANTOSH V. GAWDE,
Deputy Secretary to Government.
The Notification bearing No.TLC 2023/CR-37/M-10 dated
15th September 2023 issued by the State Government which is
also under challenge herein whereby name of Osmanabad
District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village has been changed to
Dharashiv District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village is also
quoted hereunder:
"REVENUE AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT
Mantralaya, Madam Cama Marg, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk,
Mumbai 400 032, dated the 15th September, 2023.
NOTIFICATION
MAHARASHTRA LAND REVENUE CODE,1966.
No. TLC. 2023/CR-37/M-10.-- In exercise of the powers
conferred by clause (vi) of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (Mah. XLI of 1966) and
of all other powers enabling it in that behalf, the Government of
Maharashtra after previous publication as required by sub-section
(4) of the said section 4 and having considered the objections and
suggestions thereto, hereby alters the names of the revenue
areas specified in column (1) of the Schedule appended
hereunder and renames them as mentioned against each of them
in column (2) of the said Schedule.
Basavraj Page|13
93.22-PIL+.docx
Schedule
(1) (2)
Osmanabad District Dharashiv District
Osmanabad Sub-Division Dharashiv Sub-Division
Osmanabad Taluka Dharashiv Taluka
Osmanabad Village Dharashiv Village
2. Any reference, in any law, instrument or other
document, to the revenue areas specified in column (1) of the
Schedule aforesaid (as they existed immediately before the
publication of this notification in the Maharashtra Government
Gazette) shall, unless the context requires otherwise, be deemed
to be a reference to the revenue areas as renamed in column (2)
of the said Schedule.
By order and in the name of the Governor
of Maharashtra,
SANTOSH V. GAWDE,
Deputy Secretary to Government."
(C) FACTS:
3. Prior to impugned notifications, earlier as well an attempt
was made by the State Government to change the name of
Aurangabad city to Sambhajinagar city and also to change the
names of revenue units. Aurangabad Municipal Corporation
passed a resolution on 19th June 1995 recommending to change
the name of Aurangabad city to Sambhajinagar city. The State
Government issued a draft notification under section 3(4) of the
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act of 1949) on 9th November 1995 inviting
Basavraj Page|14
93.22-PIL+.docx
objections and suggestions with respect to the said draft for the
purpose of issuing a Notification under section 3(2) of the Act of
1949 read with Section 21 of the Maharashtra General Clauses
Act 1904 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1904). The draft
Notification was issued inviting objections to the proposal to alter
the name of city known by the name "city of Aurangabad" and
rename it to be "City of Sambhajinagar".
4. Another Notification was issued on 9 th November 1995 by
the State Government in Revenue and Forest Department under
Section 4(4) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966
(hereinafter referred to as the MLRC) inviting objections and
suggestions to alter the name of revenue areas from
Aurangabad Division, District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village to
Marathwada Division, Sambhajinagar District, Sambhajinagar
Sub Division, Sambhajinagar Taluka and Sambhajinagar village,
respectively.
5. The said Notification dated 9th November 1995 was
challenged by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court by filing Writ
Petition No.5565 of 1995 and also in Writ Petition No.5566 of
1995 and various other petitions. The said Writ Petitions were
Basavraj Page|15
93.22-PIL+.docx
dismissed by this Court by means of judgment and order dated
8th December 1995. The judgment and order dated 8 th
December 1995 was further challenged by filing an SLP Nos.941-
942 of 1996 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein leave to
appeal was granted on 29th January 1996, however, the State
Government vide its Notification dated 6 th September 2001
rescinded the Notification dated 9 th November 1995 in respect of
change of name of Aurangabad revenue units. By another
Notification dated 3rd October 2001 the State Government
rescinded the Notification dated 9th November 1995 which was
issued for changing the name of city of Aurangabad.
6. On issuance of Notifications dated 6th November 2001 and
3rd October 2001 by the State Government, the aforementioned
SLPs, which were converted into Civil Appeal Nos.3513-3514 of
1996, were dismissed being rendered infructuous. This is how
the first round of the attempt by the State to change the name
of Aurangabad city and revenue units aborted.
7. On 4th March 2020 the Divisional Commissioner
Aurangabad (Revenue Branch) submitted a report to the State
Government regarding renaming of the city of Aurangabad as
Basavraj Page|16
93.22-PIL+.docx
Sambhajinagar. In the said letter the resolutions dated 19 th
June 1995 and 14th January 2011 adopted by the Aurangabad
Municipal Corporation for renaming the city were mentioned
along with no-objection from the post office of Aurangabad city
and no-objection from the head office of the Railways
Department in Aurangabad city. The said report also mentioned
that there was a demand from certain quarters for change of
name, that Aurangabad is a historic city and Chhatrapati
Sambhaji Maharaj has contributed a lot to the State of
Maharashtra and hence the name of the city be changed. It was
also reported that it will be appropriate to rename the city in the
name of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj and that there is no city
in the State of Maharashtra in the name of Chhatrapati Sambhaji
Maharaj. The report submitted by the Divisional Commissioner
also stated that since it is a policy decision of the Government, it
is recommended that the appropriate decision be taken at the
level of the Government.
8. A cabinet decision is said to have been taken on 16 th July
2022 whereby the Cabinet has approved the proposal regarding
renaming of the cities of Aurangabad and Osmanabad. The
Cabinet also decided that the proposal shall be sent to the
Basavraj Page|17
93.22-PIL+.docx
Central Government and thereafter the name of the Division,
District, Taluka as well as the Municipal Corporation and the
Municipality will be changed accordingly. The Cabinet also
suggested that the proceedings in this regard will be carried out
separately by the Revenue and Forest Department and the
Urban Development Department, as per Rules.
9. It appears that the Ministry of Home Affairs of the
Government of India vide its letter dated 7 th February 2023 has
approved the proposal for changing the name of Osmanabad city
to Dharashiv. Similarly, the Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India, vide letter dated 24 th February 2023 has
approved the proposal of the State Government for changing the
name of Aurangabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar city and
accordingly, two separate Notifications have been issued on 24 th
February 2023 by the State Government notifying that the name
of city of Aurangabad is changed to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
city and that of Osmanabad city to Dharashiv city. These are the
final Notifications issued on 24th February 2023 which are under
challenge in these petitions.
10. So far as change of name of revenue areas or units is
Basavraj Page|18
93.22-PIL+.docx
concerned a draft Notification was issued on 24 th February 2023
under Section 4(4) of the MLRC inviting objections and
suggestions to the proposed alteration in the name of revenue
areas from Aurangabad Division, District, Sub Division, Taluka
and Village to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Division, District, Sub
Division, Taluka and Village. Similarly, a draft Notification was
issued on the same day i.e. on 24 th February 2023 inviting
objections to the proposal to alter the name of revenue areas of
Osmanabad District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village to
Dharashiv District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village. After
receiving the objections and suggestions as required by the
aforementioned draft Notifications dated 24 th February 2023, two
separate final Notifications, both on 15 th September 2023, have
been issued by the State Government whereby the name of
Aurangabad Division, District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village
has been changed to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Division,
District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village and the name of
Osmanabad District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village has been
changed to Dharashiv District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village.
It is these two Notifications dated 15 th September 2023 altering
the names of revenue areas or units which have also been
Basavraj Page|19
93.22-PIL+.docx
challenged in these petitions.
11. Thus, the grievance raised in these writ petitions relates to
change of name of two cities, namely Aurangabad and
Osmanabad in the State of Maharashtra and also in relation to
the change of name of revenue units or areas which before the
impugned notifications were known as Aurangabad and
Osmanabad revenue areas.
(D) RIVAL CONTENTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PARTIES:
12. Though several submissions have been made on behalf of
the Petitioners as also on behalf of the Respondents taking the
Court to historical, social and cultural background and
perspective in which these two places were founded and came to
be known by a particular name, however, we do not find it
appropriate to judicially scrutinize such submissions for the
reason that in our view, challenge to any action of the State has
to be confined to legal and justiciable basis and not emotive
grounds. There is yet another reason for the Court to observe
that such emotive arguments need not be gone into by the Court
to examine the impugned action on the part of the State
Government in changing the names of the cities and revenue
Basavraj Page|20
93.22-PIL+.docx
areas and the reason is that there can always be two or more
perspectives from historical, sociological and cultural point of
view in these matters and it is difficult for the Court to arrive at
any legal conclusion in absence of any judicially manageable
standards available to the Court to adjudicate such aspects.
(D1) SUBMISSIONS BY THE PETITIONERS:
13. Keeping the aforesaid in mind we now proceed to note the
submissions made and the grounds taken by the Petitioners for
challenging the change of name of cities.
14. Shri Y. H. Muchhala, learned Senior Advocate representing
some of the Petitioners, at the very outset, has submitted that
the Petitioners are not seeking any historical verdict in respect of
the two rival Kings Viz. Aurangzeb and Chhatrapati Sambhaji
Maharaj who further stated that the petitions have not even filed
to justify/glorify the acts of Aurangzeb, King of the Day and in
whose name Aurangabad city has been known for more than 350
years and that the people of the region have accepted the name
of city of Aurangabad for last about 350 years however, the
decision impugned in these petitions reflect an attempt to create
polarization and division in the civil society by forcing them to
Basavraj Page|21
93.22-PIL+.docx
remember the past which is violating of Articles 14, 21 and 29 of
the Constitution of India and the basic constitutional values and
morality touching upon the value of fraternity in the society.
15. It has further been argued by Shri Mucchala that the
names of the city is connected with the identity of the
inhabitants which reinforces the sense of belonging and
continuity and as such the impugned Notifications are an
attempt to erase the sense of belonging of the inhabitants of
Aurangabad city. He submits that the impugned action, thus,
undermines the identity of the residents of the area which is
violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He has also
argued that the provisions of Section 4(1)(iv) and 4(3) of MLRC
have been violated and even assuming that the said provisions
do not apply, the basic constitutional value of social justice
requires that the principles underlying the procedure prescribed
under Section 4(1)(vi) and 4(3) should have been followed.
16. Shri Mucchala, learned Senior Advocate has stated that the
issue of changing the name of Aurangabad to Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar is justiciable as adjudication of such an issue
involves fundamental right of individuals as well as group rights
Basavraj Page|22
93.22-PIL+.docx
of religious minority. He has further stated that no public
interest will be served by changing the name of Aurangabad and
every action of the State must be in public interest and since the
impugned decision of the State Government in changing the
name of the city does not farther any public interest, it is not
tenable. He has also argued that the State Government has
failed to produce any material to establish as to what
necessitated the Government to take impugned action after such
an attempt was aborted earlier. It is further his argument that
the shelter taken by the State Government to the Central
Government Notification dated 11th September 1953 which is
revised in the year 2004 is not available to the State
Government for the reason that it is an executive/administrative
instruction and, thus, does not have any statutory force and
accordingly, such administrative instructions cannot override
statutory provisions of MLRC. His submission further is that the
impugned action of the State Government has been taken only
to gain political mileage and that such action cannot sustain on
the touchstone of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Vs. Union of
India & Ors.1
2023 SCC OnLine SC 207
Basavraj Page|23
93.22-PIL+.docx
17. Drawing our attention to the judgment of the division
bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad Vs.
State of Maharashtra2, it has been argued by Shri Mucchala
that in the said case it has been held that even for renaming of
city, the exercise as contemplated in Section 4 of MLRC has to
be followed and since in the instant case no such exercise was
undertaken so far renaming of cities are concerned, hence, the
impugned Notifications renaming the cities are bad in law. He
has also relied on the judgments of this Court in the case of
Balasaheb Sahebrao Bodkhe Vs. State of Maharshtra 3,
Prashant Babusaheb Ghiramkar Vs. State of Maharashtra
& Ors.4 and Dr. Avinash Ramkrsihan Kashiwar & Ors. Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors.5
18. To emphasize that every State action should be within the
framework of constitutional morality and values, Shri Mucchala
has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd) & Anr.
Vs. Union of India & Ors.6, S.R. Bommai Vs. Union of
1996(1) Mh.L.J. 589
2016 SCC OnLine BOM 5216
2013 (6) Mh.L.J. 703
2015(5) Mh.L.J. 830
(2017) 10 SCC 1
Basavraj Page|24
93.22-PIL+.docx
India7, Lok Prahari v. State of U.P.8. He has also emphasized
that every State action should be in public interest and no such
action of the State can be approved if it puts the State
exchequer to financial hardship. It is on the aforesaid grounds
that Shri Mucchala has urged that the impugned decision of the
State Government renaming the cities is illegal and against the
very essence of the principle of equality as envisaged,
proclaimed and mandated by the Constitution of India.
19. Shri S. B. Talekar, learned Counsel appearing for some of
the Petitioners has argued that the issue regarding renaming of
Osmanabad cannot be brushed aside by terming it to be a
political question lacking judicially discoverable and manageable
standards and therefore being non-justiciable. He has also
argued that the impugned decision is not in conformity with the
principles of constitutional governance and constitutional
morality and such action is subject to judicial review by this
Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It has also
been submitted by Shri Talekar that the very basis of decision
pertaining to renaming of Aurangabad and Osmanabad is an
(1994) 3 SCC 1
(2018) 6 SCC 1
Basavraj Page|25
93.22-PIL+.docx
outcome of the political philosophy of the ruling party in power
and such decisions are in fact calculated attempts to wipe out
reminiscences and relics of Muslim rule from the public mind as
well as history and that every Government action, whether
political or administrative, are to be aimed essentially
governance of the State as per constitutional principles including
secularism. He has also placed reliance on Ashwini Kumar
Upadhyay (supra) and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the said case emphasized on the secular and federal
character of the Constitution and observed that the governance
must conform to rule of law, secularism and constitutionalism of
which Article 14 stands out as the guarantee of both equality
and fairness in the State's action.
20. Shri Talekar has also argued that the impugned decision of
the State Government is violative of composite culture and
heritage which is one of the facets of Article 21 and that the
decision of the State Government is based on extraneous
considerations and political reasons which are absolutely
irrelevant basis for taking such decision. Shri Talekar has further
argued that the impugned decision suffers from mala fides as
the attending circumstances which precipitated the impugned
Basavraj Page|26
93.22-PIL+.docx
decision lead to a conclusion that such decisions are nothing but
an outcome of political agenda followed by the political party in
power.
21. Shri Talekar has also raised an issue of non compliance of
procedure as prescribed under Section 4 of the MLRC. He also
took a ground of violation of Article 14 stating that the impugned
decision is not only arbitrary but is discriminatory inasmuch as if
the objective of the Government is to restore the original names
of the cities, a uniform policy ought to have been adopted.
According to him, since the original name of the Aurangabad was
Khadki, hence the said name ought to have been restored.
22. He has also argued that the instructions issued by the
Central Government which are said to have been followed in the
instant case has to be read into Section 4 of the MLRC and since
so far as the name of city is concerned, the procedure as
prescribed under Section 4 of the MLRC has admittedly not been
followed, such non compliance of the prescribed procedure
renders the impugned decision a nullity. He has also stated that
in terms of the provisions of Section of 4(1)(vi) of MLRC naming
of any revenue are can be altered only if its limits are also
Basavraj Page|27
93.22-PIL+.docx
altered and since in this case limits have not been altered, as
such, change of name was not permissible in terms of Section
4(1)(vi) of MLRC.
23. Shri Talekar has also urged that the judgment of the
division bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Mustaq
Ahemad (supra) has not correctly interpreted Section 4(1)(vi)
of the MLRC hence, the same needs to be revisited and reviewed
on the ground, inter alia, that challenge in Mohd. Mustaq
Ahemad (supra) was to a draft Notification whereas challenge
in these petitions is to the final Notifications and further that the
objections filed to the draft Notifications have not been
considered at all by the State Government in the present case.
A re-look into the judgment in the case of Mohd. Mustaq
Ahemad (supra) has been sought by Shri Talekar also on the
ground that the points of law which have arisen in the instant
case were not there when Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra)
was decided and also that the policy of the State Government for
changing the names of places was not an issue for the Court in
Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra). Shri Talekar has drawn our
attention to the definition clause contained in Section 2(43) of
the MLRC, according to which "village" includes a town or city
Basavraj Page|28
93.22-PIL+.docx
and all the land belonging to a village, town or city. Shri Talekar
has stated that since the said definition of the expression
"village" includes a town or city, hence the provisions of Section
4 of MLRC are applicable for change of name of even cities with
full force and since in the instant case so far as changing the
names of cities is concerned, the said provision has admittedly
not been followed, therefore, the impugned decision is illegal.
24. Shri Anil Anturkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on
behalf of the Petitioners has argued that the issue in the instant
case is not related to the decision rather the decision making
process. In his submission, he has stated that the guidelines
issued by the Central Government for change of name of city,
resolution passed by the Legislative Assembly of the State
Government and also by the Legislative Council and the one
passed by the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation and the No-
Objection issued by the Central Government, are completely
irrelevant to the issue. According to Shri Anturkar, the real issue
are non compliance of the provisions contained in Section 4(1)
(iv) of the MLRC and the definition of the phrase "village"
occurring in Section 2(43) of the MLRC and Section 24 of the
General Clauses Act.
Basavraj Page|29
93.22-PIL+.docx
25. He has further argued that the draft inviting objections
issued by the Revenue and Forest Department included a
proposal for change of name of Aurangabad city as well; and it is
to be construed as such for the simple reason that the word
"village" under Section 2(43) of the MLRC includes the city as
well. His submission is that, however, without waiting for the
decision on the objections in relation to the proposed alteration
of name of the city, the Department of General Administration of
the Government of Maharashtra issued final Notification
changing the name of Aurangabad city to Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar which is in complete contravention of Section
4(4) of the MLRC for the reason that Section 24 of the General
Clauses Act has not been complied with.
26. Shri Anturkar has urged that the Notification issued by the
Revenue and Forest Department uses the word "village" whereas
the Notification issued by the General Administration Department
uses the word "city" however, such use of these words is
completely irrelevant for the reason that the word "village"
includes "city" in terms of Section 2(43) of the MLRC and also it
is paradoxical to note that the General Administration
Department took a decision on 24th February 2023 to change the
Basavraj Page|30
93.22-PIL+.docx
name of Aurangabad city whereas it was still expected by
Department of Revenue and Forest to consider the objections
pursuant to the draft Notification. Submission further, as made
by Shri Anturkar, is that if any name of any particular city is
included in other statutes, such inclusion alleviates status of
such city to be statutory in nature qua the other legislations or
statutes and such status cannot be changed by virtue of an
executive action.
27. Citing an example, Shri Anturkar says that because of the
impugned Notifications, mention of the name of Aurangabad in
National Law University Act or Maharashtra Ren Control Act will
not get changed to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar without any
corresponding amendment in these two enactments. In this
regard he has cited the judgments in the case of M.G.Pandke
Vs. Municipal Council Hinganghat, District-Wardha 9 and
also Shikshan Mandal & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra &
Ors.10
28. Drawing our attention to the judgment in the case of
Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) it has further been argued by
Shri Anturkar that even alteration in the name under the
(1993) (SUPPL.)(1) SCC 708
(2012) 2 Mh.L.J. 948
Basavraj Page|31
93.22-PIL+.docx
provisions of Section 4 (1)(vi) of MLRC will be attracted only
when amalgamation, division, abolition or constitution of a
revenue area takes place. He submits that Section 4(1)(vi) will
be applicable only when there is alteration in the boundaries of
such revenue area. He also emphasized that the judgment in
the case of Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) requires a relook.
According to him occurrence of the word "such" at three places
in section 4(1)(vi) of MLRC makes it clear that Section 4(1)(vi)
will be applicable only if there is alteration in the limits of such
revenue area. His further submission is that any power vested
in an authority has to be exercised only in public interest and
unless in the instant case it is shown that impugned decision has
been taken in public interest, the powers so exercised by the
State Government cannot be justified.
29. On behalf of certain other Petitioners, it has also been
argued that the principles and guidelines laid in the Notification
of the Central Government, dated 11th September 1953 have
clearly been ignored by the State Government while taking the
impugned decision inasmuch as that the said guidelines provide,
inter alia, that unless there is some very special reason it is not
desirable to change a name which people have got used to. It
Basavraj Page|32
93.22-PIL+.docx
has further been argued that as per the said guidelines, the
names of the villages etc. having historic connection should not
be changed as far as possible and though Aurangabad is a
historic city, in violation of the said guidelines the impugned
decision has been taken.
30. Various other grounds have been urged by the Petitioners
which have their roots in discussion about the history, sociology
and culture of the region.
31. Another ground taken by the Petitioners to impeach the
impugned decision is that the resolution said to have been
passed by the Cabinet on 16th July 2002 cannot be said to be
decision of the Cabinet in view of the provisions contained in
Article 164(1A) of the Constitution of India which mandates that
total number of Ministers including Chief Minister in the Council
of Ministers shall not exceed 15% of the total Members of
Legislative Assembly provided that the number of Ministers
including Chief Minister of the State shall not be less than
twelve. Submission is that since, admittedly, the decision is
taken by only two members of the Cabinet and hence any
decision by a Cabinet comprising of only two members is not
permissible in view of the mandate of Article 164(1)(A) of the
Basavraj Page|33
93.22-PIL+.docx
Constitution of India and thus any resolution passed by two
Ministers, cannot be said to be a resolution of the Cabinet.
32. Contending the aforesaid grounds, it has been urged on
behalf of the Petitioners that the State has utterly failed to give
any good reason which can sustain the impugned decision and
hence the Writ Petitions deserve to be allowed.
(D2) SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE STATE-
RESPONDENTS:
33. Opposing the Writ Petitions, Dr. Birendra Saraf, learned
Advocate General of State of Maharashtra has submitted that
the ground based on the provisions of Section 2(43) of the MLRC
and non-compliance of Section 4 of the said Act is based on
complete misreading of the said provisions. He has stated that
so far as the altering the name of a city is concerned, Section 4
of the MLRC does not have any application whatsoever and
accordingly, no draft Notification was issued under Section 4(4)
of the MLRC inviting objections and suggestions for the proposed
renaming of the cities of Aurangabad and Osmanabad to the
cities of Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv. He has
drawn our attention to Section 2(43) of MLRC which falls in the
definition clause of the Act and has submitted that the said
Basavraj Page|34
93.22-PIL+.docx
definition clause begins with the phrase "in this context unless
otherwise requires". According to learned Advocate General,
therefore, inclusion of "city" or "town" in the phrase "village" as
it occurs in Section 2(43), will be subject to the context in which
it is to be applied.
34. He has argued that heading of Section 4 of the MLRC is
"Constitution of Revenue Areas" and accordingly, it provides
for constitution of revenue areas in pyramidical structure such as
(i) a revenue division, which comprises of districts, (2) a district,
which comprises of sub divisions, (3) a sub division which
comprises of Talukas, (4) a taluka which comprises of villages,
(5) a village which comprises of local areas, and (5) a local area.
35. According to Dr. Saraf, Section 4 of the MLRC does not
provide for constitution of a city; it rather provides for
constitution of revenue area and hence so far as application of
the definition of the word "village" occurring in Section 2(43) of
the MLRC qua constitution of revenue areas under Section 4 is
concerned, the context i.e. constitution of revenue areas does
not require the "city" to be included in the definition of the word
"village".
Basavraj Page|35
93.22-PIL+.docx
36. It has, been argued further by Dr. Saraf that Section 4(1)
(vi) of MLRC provides for not only alteration of the limits of
revenue areas by amalgamation, division or in any other manner
or abolition of any such area, but also to name such revenue
area and even alter the name of such area. Thus, in his
submission, Section 4 does not have any application so far as
naming or renaming of a city or a town is concerned. He has
also stated that Sub Section 3 of Section 4 clearly provides that
revenue areas existing at the commencement of MLRC shall
continue under the names they bear unless otherwise altered
under Section 4. Thus, his submission is that the entire scheme
of Section 4 will have application only in case of naming or
renaming of the revenue areas such as division, sub division,
taluka, village or a local area and not for renaming of a city or a
town.
37. He has also argued that as per Section 4, the village or a
local area constituting a village is the smallest unit of revenue
areas and it is implicit in section 4 that a district shall be smaller
than a division, a sub division shall be smaller than a district, a
taluka shall be smaller than a sub division, and village shall be
Basavraj Page|36
93.22-PIL+.docx
smaller than a taluka. Keeping this aspect in mind, according to
Dr. Saraf, inclusion of the city or town within the phrase "village"
in terms of Section 2(43) of the MLRC is not borne out in relation
to its application to any procedure undertaken under Section 4 of
the MLRC.
38. He has stated that a city is entirely a distinct concept and
that it is a concept of urban local self-governance as
contemplated under Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India
read with corresponding municipal laws. He has further
submitted that "larger urban area" or "smaller urban area" as
contemplated under Section 243-Q of the Constitution of India
usually encompass in their folds areas comprising of several
revenue villages and talukas and even district and thus his
submission is that the term "village" under Section 4 of MLRC
can by no stretch of imagination or reasoning include a "city" for
the reason that the context as reflected from Section 4 does not
so require.
39. On behalf of the State - Respondents, Dr. Saraf has also
drawn our attention to Section 3 of the Maharashtra Municipal
Corporations Act, 1946 which provides for constitution of a
Basavraj Page|37
93.22-PIL+.docx
"larger urban area" known as a city which has a population of
more than three lacs and further that Section 2(8) of Municipal
Corporations Act defines "city" to mean a larger urban area
specified in a Notification issued under Article 243-Q(2) of the
Constitution of India or under Section 3(2) of the Municipal
Corporations Act. His submission, thus, is that constitution of
larger/smaller urban area is relevant for the purpose of
formation and administration of a local self-governance limit as
contemplated in Part-IX-A of the Constitution of India and since
the village is smallest in pyramid of the revenue areas under
Section 4 of the MLRC and a city usually comprises of several
villages and some times even more than one talukas or districts,
therefore, a village can never be said to be included in a smaller
or larger urban area and accordingly, reading a city to be
included in the definition of the word "village"
in terms of Section 2(43) of the MLRC is out of context qua
Section 4 of the MLRC.
40. His submission is that the Aurangabad city is a larger urban
area and Osmanabad is smaller urban area in terms of the
provisions contained in Part-IX-A of the Constitution of India
and are covered by Municipal Corporations Act and the
Basavraj Page|38
93.22-PIL+.docx
Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act, respectively, and since
these cities comprise of several revenue villages and therefore, a
"city" can never be included within the phrase "village" occurring
in Section 4 of the MLRC.
41. He has further argued that so far as the change of name of
revenue areas is concerned, the procedure as contemplated
under Section 4 of the MLRC was followed inasmuch as before
issuing the final Notification, in terms of the requirement of
Section 4(4) of the MLRC read with Section 24 of General
Clauses Act the previous draft Notification was published inviting
suggestions and objections and it is only on the decision on the
said objections and suggestions that the final Notifications have
been issued.
42. Dr. Saraf's further submission is that there is no
requirement of issuing a draft Notification inviting objections and
suggestions for issuing a Notification for naming or renaming a
city for the reason that neither the Municipal Corporations Act
nor Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act contains any such
requirement.
Basavraj Page|39
93.22-PIL+.docx
43. Dr. Saraf has also argued that there is no statutory
provision governing the naming/renaming a city and hence the
Notification issued in this behalf which has been challenged in
these petitions, is an executive/administrative act.
44. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of 1997(2) SCC 53, it has been submitted on behalf of
the State Respondents that if a definition clause in a statute
begins with the phrase "unless the context otherwise requires",
it implies that such definition has to be read and applied in the
light of the context in the scheme of the Act.
45. In respect of the judgment of the division bench of this
Court in the case of Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) regarding
following the procedure contemplated under Section 4 of the
MLRC for changing the name of the city it has been stated by
learned Advocate General, same is not binding being per-
incuriam. His submission is that the observations made by the
Court in Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) that Section 4 of the
MLRC is a declaration of the executive power of the
Government to change the name of revenue area including a
village which includes a city was based on an argument made
Basavraj Page|40
93.22-PIL+.docx
by the learned Counsel representing the State in the said matter
which was in complete ignorance of the provisions of part-IX-A
and Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India, the Municipal
Corporations Act and the Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act.
His submission is that since the said declaration in Mohd.
Mustaq Ahemad (supra) was made without noticing the
relevant provisions of the Constitution and the Municipal
Corporations Act and Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act,
accordingly, the judgment in Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra)
is not binding.
46. On behalf of the State, it has also been contended that
changing the name of revenue areas or that of a city or town
does not involve infringement of any fundamental right as
naming or renaming of a city or revenue area does not involve
any fundamental right of a citizen and therefore, the Writ
Petitions are not liable to be entertained.
47. As regards the submissions made on behalf of the
Petitioners that Section 4 of the MLRC cannot be taken aid of for
changing the name of a revenue area without alteration in its
boundary, Dr. Saraf has submitted that the judgment of the
Basavraj Page|41
93.22-PIL+.docx
coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Mustaq(supra) has
clearly given a finding that alteration in the name of a revenue
area can be made even in absence of change of boundaries of
such revenue areas and hence such an argument is not tenable.
He has further stated that Section 4(1)(vi) MLRC does not limit
the power of the State Government to rename a revenue are
only in a situation where the limits of the revenue areas are
altered or any revenue area is constituted or it is abolished. His
submission is that emphasis of the Petitioners on the words
"such revenue area" after the words "alter the limit" occurring in
Section 4(1)(vi) of the MLRC is misplaced. He concluded that
the words "such revenue area" is followed by the words "so
constituted" and hence such revenue areas refer to the area
constituted under Section 4(1)(vi) of the MLRC. His submission
is that the scheme of Section 4 clearly provides that after
constituting a revenue area under Section 4(1)(i) to 4(1)(v), the
State Government can exercise various powers including the
power to alter the limits by amalgamation, division or abolition
of such revenue areas or alter the name of such revenue areas.
These powers to abolish such revenue area and power to alter
the name of such revenue areas are independent of each other
Basavraj Page|42
93.22-PIL+.docx
and hence his submission is that the submissions made by the
learned Counsel for the Petitioners are absolutely misconceived.
48. Replying to the submissions made by Shri Anturkar,
learned Senior Advocate appearing for some of the Petitioners
that in case name of a city or a revenue area incorporated in
other statutes, such name cannot be changed without amending
the other statutes, it has been argued by Dr. Saraf that power to
change the name of a city is not circumscribed because the
name of a city has been used in other statutes. He has further
argued that necessary amendment would be made in the other
relevant statutes and till such time they will continue as before.
His submission is, however, that this does not mean that without
amending each of the statutes, name of a city or a revenue area
itself cannot be changed.
49. In respect of the argument based on non-compliance of the
Central Government guidelines issued on 11 th September 1953,
it has been submitted by Dr.Saraf that these guidelines do not
have any relevance for changing the name of a city and
therefore, the ground of alleged non-compliance does not have
any bearing on the exercise undertaken by the Stat Government.
Basavraj Page|43
93.22-PIL+.docx
His submission is that these guidelines are only advisory in
nature which have been issued as executive instructions and
hence they do not have any statutory force. According to Dr.
Saraf, in this view of the matter, non-compliance of the Central
Government guidelines does not make out a case for quashing
the impugned Notifications. He has, however, stated that the
Central Government issued the No-Objection for change of
names only after satisfying itself that the requisites as per the
guidelines are fulfilled.
50. Apart from raising the aforementioned objections to the
prayers made in the Writ Petitions on behalf of the State -
Respondents, it has also been argued that the issue relating to
naming or renaming of a city or a revenue area lies in the realm
of a policy decision and since in this case the Petitioners have
utterly failed to point out infringement or violation or
contravention of any statutory or constitutional provisions, it will
be beyond the scope of interference by this Court in such
decisions. He has also stated that the issue regarding naming of
a city or a revenue area may or may not be judicially reviewable,
however, such an issue is not justiciable. Urging these grounds,
learned Advocate General states that the Writ Petitions are liable
Basavraj Page|44
93.22-PIL+.docx
to be dismissed.
(E) DISCUSSION:
51. Before delving into the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties, certain constitutional and
statutory provisions are relevant to be noticed, which are as
follows:
(a) Constitution of India
243-Q Constitution of Municipalities.
(1) There shall be constituted in every State,-
(a) A Nagar Panchayat (by whatever name called) for a transitional
area, that is to say, an area in transition from a rural area to an urban
area;
(b) A Municipal Council for a smaller urban area; and
(c) A Municipal Corporation for a larger urban area, in accordance
with the provisions of this Part:
Provided that a Municipality under this clause may not be constituted
in such urban area or part thereof as the Governor may, having regard to the
size of the area and the municipal services being provided or proposed to be
provided by an industrial establishment in that area and such other factors as
he may deem fit, by public notification, specify to be an industrial township.
(b) The Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act,
Section 2. Definitions
(1) ............
(2) ...........
(3) ...........
(4) ............
(5) ...........
(6) ...........
(7) ...........
(8) "City" means the larger urban area specified in a notification issued in
respect thereof under clause (2) of article 243-Q of the Constitution of India
Basavraj Page|45
93.22-PIL+.docx
or under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Act, forming a City, and in
respect of the city of Nagpur means, the area comprised in the City of
Nagpur on the date of commencement of the Bombay Provincial Municipal
Corporations (Amendment) and the City of Nagpur Corporation (Repeal) Act,
2011.
3. Specification of larger urban areas and constitution of
corporations
(1) The Corporation for every City constituted under this Act existing on
the date of coming into force of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations and
Municipal Councils (Amendment) Act, 1994, specified as a larger urban area
in the notification issued in respect thereof under clause (2) of article 243-Q
of the Constitution of India, shall be deemed to be a duly constituted
Municipal Corporation for the larger urban area so specified forming a City,
known by the name " The Municipal Corporation of the City of ............... ".
(1A) The Corporation of the City of Nagpur incorporated under the City of
Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 for the larger urban area specified in the
notification issued in this respect under clause (2) of article 243-Q of the
Constitution of India shall, on and from the date of coming into force of the
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations (Amendment) and the City of
Nagpur Corporation (Repeal) Act, 2011, be deemed to have been constituted
under this Act and accordingly the provisions of this Act shall apply to the
area of the City of Nagpur.
(2) Save as provided in sub-section (1), the State Government may,
having regard to the factors mentioned in clause (2) of article 243-Q of the
Constitution of India, specify by notification in the Official Gazette, any urban
area with a population of not less than three lakhs as a larger urban area;
(2A) Every larger urban area so specified by the State Government under
sub-section (2), shall form a City and there shall be a Municipal Corporation
for such larger urban area known by the name of the '' Municipal Corporation
of the City of .............";
(3) (a) Subject to the provision of sub-section (2), the State Government
may also from time to time after consultation with the Corporation by
notification in the Official Gazette alter the limits specified for any larger
urban area under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) so as to include therein
or to exclude therefrom, such area as is specified in the notification.
(b) Where any area is included within the limits of the larger urban
area under clause (a), any appointments, notifications, notices, taxes,
orders, schemes, licences, permissions, rules, by-laws or forms made,
issued, imposed or granted under this Act or any other law, which are for the
time being in force in the larger urban area shall, notwithstanding anything
contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise
provided in section 129A or any other provision of this Act, apply to and be in
force in the additional area also from the date that area is included in the
larger urban area.
(4) The power to issue a notification under this section shall be subject to the
condition of previous publication:
Basavraj Page|46
93.22-PIL+.docx
Provided that, where the population of any urban area, in respect of
which a Council has been constituted under the provisions of the
Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships
Act, 1965, as per the latest census figures has exceeded three lakhs, the
State Government may, for the purpose of constituting a Corporation under
this Act for such urban area, with the same boundaries, dispense with the
condition of previous publication of the notification under this section.
(c) The Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar
Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965
2. Definitions
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,--
(6) " Council " means a municipal council constituted or deemed to
have been constituted for a smaller urban area specified in a
notification issued in this respect, under clause (2) of article 243-Q of
the Constitution of India or under sub-section (2) of section 3 of this
Act ] ;
(24) "municipal area" means the territorial area of a Council or a
Nagar Panchayat.
3. Specification of areas as smaller urban areas
(1) A Council for every municipal area existing on the date of coming into
force of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations and Municipal Councils
(Amendment) Act, 1994, Mah.XLI of 1994, specified as a smaller urban area
in a notification issued under clause (2) of article 243-Q of the Constitution of
India in respect thereof, shall be deemed to be a duly constituted Municipal
Council known by the name ........................... Municipal Council.
(2) Save as provided in sub-section (1), the State Government may,
having regard to the factors mentioned in clause (2) of article 243-Q of the
Constitution of India, specify, by notification in the Official Gazette, any local
area as a smaller urban area :
Provided that no such area shall be so specified as a smaller urban
area unless the State Government, after making such inquiry as it may deem
fit is satisfied that,--
(a) the population of such area is not less than 25,000 ; and
(b) the percentage of employment in non-agricultural activities in
such area is not less than thirty-five per cent.
(2A) For every smaller urban area so specified by the State Government
under sub-section (2), there shall be constituted a Municipal Council known
by the name ..................................................... Municipal Council.
(3) Before the publication of a notification under sub-section (2), the
Basavraj Page|47
93.22-PIL+.docx
State Government shall cause to be published in the Official Gazette, and
also in at least one newspaper circulating in the area to be specified in the
notification, a proclamation announcing the intention of Government to issue
such notification, and inviting all persons who entertain any objection to the
said proposal to submit the same in writing with the reasons therefor, to the
Collector of the District within not less than thirty days from the date of the
publication of the proclamation in the Official Gazette.
Copies of the proclamation in Marathi shall also be posted in
conspicuous places in the area proposed to be declared as a municipal area.
(4) The Collector shall, with all reasonable despatch, forward any
objection so submitted to the State Government.
(5) No such notification as aforesaid shall be issued by the State
Government unless the objections, if any, so submitted are in its opinion
insufficient or invalid.
(d) The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966
2. Definitions.-
In this Code, unless the context otherwise requires -
1 .............
2 .............
3 .............
(43) "village" includes a town or city and all the land belonging to a
village, town or city
4. Constitution of revenue areas.-
(1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official
Gazette, specify-
(i) The districts (including the City of Bombay) which consti-
tute a division;
(ii) The sub-divisions which constitute a district;
(iii) The talukas which constitute a sub-division;
(iv) The villages which constitute a taluka;
(v) The local area which constitutes a village; and
(vi) Alter the limits of any such revenue area so constituted by
amalgamation, division or in any manner whatsoever, or
abolish any such revenue area and may name and alter
the name of any such revenue area; and in any case
where any area is renamed, then all references in any law
or instrument or other document to the area under its
original name shall be deemed to be references to the
area as renamed, unless expressly otherwise provided:
Provided that, the State Government shall, as soon as
Basavraj Page|48
93.22-PIL+.docx
possible after the commencement of this Code, constitute by
like notification every wadi, and any area outside the limits of
the gaothan of a village having a separate habitation (such
wadi or area having a population of not less than (three
hundred, as ascertained by a revenue officer not below the
rank of a Tahsildar to be a village; and specify therein the
limits of the village so constituted.
(2) The Collector may by an order published in the prescribed
manner arrange the villages in a taluka which shall constitute a saza
and the sazas in a taluka which, shall constitute a circle, and may
alter the limits of, or abolish, any saza or circle, so constituted.
(3) The divisions, districts, sub-divisions, talukas, circles, sazas
and villages existing at the commencement of this Code shall continue
under the names they bear respectively to be the divisions, districts,
sub-divisions, talukas, circles, sazas and villages, unless otherwise
altered under this section.
(4) Every notification or order made under this section shall be
subject to the condition of previous publication; and the provisions of
Section 24 of the Maharashtra General Clauses Act, shall, so far as
may be, apply in relation to such notification or order, as they apply in
relation to rules to be made after previous publication.
(e) The Maharashtra General Clauses Act, 1904
Section 24
24. Where, by any Bombay Act or Maharashtra Act, a power to make
rules or bylaws is expressed to be given subject to the condition of the rules
or by-laws being made after previous publication, then the following
provisions shall apply, namely;--
(a) the authority having power to make the rules or by-laws shall,
before making them, publish a draft of the proposed rules or by-
laws for the information of persons likely to be affected thereby;
(b) the publication shall be made in such manner as that authority
deems to be sufficient or, if the condition with respect to previous
publication so requires, in such manner as the Central
Government, or as the case may be, the State Government
prescribes;
(c) there shall be published with the draft, a notice specifying a date
on or after which the draft will be taken into consideration;
(d) the authority having power to make the rules or by-laws, and,
where the rules or by-laws are to be made with the sanction,
approval or concurrence of another authority, that authority also,
shall consider any objection or suggestion which may be received
Basavraj Page|49
93.22-PIL+.docx
by the authority having power to make the rules or by-laws from
any person with respect to the draft before the date so specified;
(e) the publication in the Official Gazette of a rule or by-law
purporting to have been made in exercise of a power to make
rules or by-laws after previous publication shall be conclusive
proof that the rule or by-law has been duly made.
52. We now proceed to examine as to whether there exists
any statutory framework for naming/renaming or altering the
name of (1) a city and (2) revenue areas/units.
53. The concept of a city or a town is intrinsically contained in
the concept of various units of urban local self-governance. Prior
to insertion of Part IX-A in the Constitution by Constitution
(Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, which came into force
w.e.f. 1st June 1993, the constitution, functions and duties of
various local self-governance units which are known as
municipalities, were governed by various legislations enacted by
respective States in our country. However, through the
enactment of Constitution (Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act,
1992, these local self-governance units have been alleviated and
given constitutional status by insertion of Part IX-A in the
Constitution. Article 243-Q of the Constitution provides for
constitution of municipalities by different names. These
municipal units are broadly described as (i) smaller urban area,
Basavraj Page|50
93.22-PIL+.docx
and (ii) larger urban area.
54. We may also notice that for the purpose of giving effect to
various provisions contained in Part-IX-A of the Constitution of
India, the said provision itself provides for corresponding
amendments in various State Legislations governing the
constitution and affairs of municipal institutions. Article 243-ZF
of the Constitution of India provides that any law relating to
municipality which was in force immediately before
commencement of the Constitution (Seventy fourth Amendment)
Act, 1992, if inconsistent with the provisions of Part -IXA, shall
continue to be in force unless it is amended or repealed by a
competent Legislature or other competent authority or until the
expiration of one year from such commencement whichever is
earlier. Thus, Article 243-ZF of the Constitution of India saved
the existing laws relating to municipalities in the respective
States only till the same were amended in tune with the
provisions of Part-IXA or till expiration of one year from the date
Part-XIA was enforced, which was earlier.
55. So far as the State of Maharashtra is concerned, there are
three legislations, which govern the municipal institutions i.e.
Basavraj Page|51
93.22-PIL+.docx
urban local self-governance units and these legislations are the
Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, the Maharashtra
Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships
Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1965) and the
Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. Necessary
amendments have been made by the State Legislature in these
legislations to bring the provisions of these enactments in tune
with the provisions of Part - IXA of the Constitution of India.
The affairs of the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation are
governed by the Act of 1949, whereas the affairs of Osmanabad
Municipal Council are governed by the Act of 1965. Section 2(8)
of the Act of 1949, as quoted above, defines a city to mean a
larger urban area specified in a Notification issued in respect
thereof under Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India or under
Section 3(2) of the Act of 1949. Section 3 of the Act of 1949
provides for specification of larger urban areas and constitution
of corporations, according to which the Corporation of every city
which was constituted under the said Act and existed on the
date of coming into force the Amendment Act of 1994 and
specified as larger urban area under the Notification issued
under Clause (2) of Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India,
Basavraj Page|52
93.22-PIL+.docx
shall be deemed to be a duly constituted Municipal Corporation
for the larger urban area forming a city. Sub Section (2) of
Section 3 provides that State Government may notify any urban
area with a population of not less than three lacs as a larger
urban area. Sub Section (2) of Section 3 provides that every
larger urban area shall form a city for which there shall be a
Corporation.
56. Sub Section (3) of Section 3 of the Act of 1949 empowers
the State Government to alter the limits of any larger urban area
so as to include therein or to exclude there from any area as
may be specified in a Notification. Sub section (4) of Section 3
further provides that Notification of alteration of limits of larger
urban area can be issued subject to the condition of previous
publication with the only exception where population of any
urban area in respect of which a Municipal Council has been
constituted under the provisions of the Act of 1965 is to be
upgraded to a Municipal Corporation. Thus, the requirement of
the condition of previous publication of Notification can be
dispensed with for the purposes of constituting a Corporation
under the act of 1949 in case the population of the existing
Municipal Council exceeds three lacs.
Basavraj Page|53
93.22-PIL+.docx
57. Certain provisions of the Act of 1965 may also be discussed
at this juncture itself. The Municipal council has been defined
under section 2(6) of the Act of 1965 to mean a Municipal
Council constituted or deemed to have been constituted for a
smaller urban area specified in a Notification issued under Clause
2 of Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India or under Section
3(2) of the Act of 1965. Section 3(2) of the Act of 1965 vests
power with the State Government to specify by a Notification in
the official gazette any local area as a smaller urban area. Sub
Section (3) provides that before issuing any Notification under
sub Section (2), a proclamation announcing the intention of the
Government for specifying a smaller urban area shall be
published inviting objections to such a proposal.
58. It is also to be noticed that Section 3(1) provides that any
Municipal Council for a municipal area which existed on the date
of coming into force of the 1994 Amendment Act and specified
as a smaller urban area shall be deemed to be a duly constituted
Municipal Council.
59. Thus, the relevant provisions of the Act of 1949 and Act of
1965 as discussed above though provide for incorporation and
Basavraj Page|54
93.22-PIL+.docx
establishment of larger urban area and smaller urban area in
terms of the provisions contained in Article 243-Q of the
Constitution of India, which are known as Municipal Corporation
and Municipal Council respectively, however, the said
enactments do not contain any provision for naming/renaming or
altering the name of a Municipal Corporation or a Municipal
Council.
60. The legal position which, thus, emerges is that neither the
1949 Act nor the 1965 Act contain any provision regulating
naming/renaming or altering the name of Municipal Corporation
or a Municipal Council which are constituted and established for
a city or a town. This legal position is not being disputed by
either of the parties, however, on behalf of the Petitioners it has
been argued that Section 4(iv) read with Section 2(43) of the
MLRC contain a statutory framework for naming/ renaming or
altering the name of a city or a town. Section 2(43) and Section
4 of the MLRC have been reproduced in a preceding paragraph of
this judgment. The definition clause contained in Section 2 of
the MLRC commences with the phrase "in this Code unless the
context otherwise requires". Section 2(43) states that
"village" includes a town or city and all the land belonging to a
Basavraj Page|55
93.22-PIL+.docx
village, town or city. Section 4 empowers the State Government
to specify revenue areas or units known as a division or a district
or a sub division or a taluka or a village or a local area. Section
4(1)(vi) also empowers the State Government to alter the limits
of any revenue area by amalgamation, division or in any manner
whatsoever. It also permits the State government to abolish
any such revenue area and also to name and alter the name of
any such revenue area.
61. Thus, so far as naming/renaming or altering the name of a
revenue area is concerned, section 4(1)(vi) of the MLRC clearly
empowers the State Government to do that. This power is,
however, subject to the provisions of sub section (iv) according
to which every Notification or order in respect of specification of
revenue areas or alteration in the limits of revenue area or
naming / renaming or altering the name of revenue area, can be
issued or made only subject to the condition of previous
publication and application of the provisions of Section 24 of the
Maharashtra General Clauses Act, 1904. It is to be noted that
Section 24 of the General Clauses Act provides that where in any
State enactment, power to make rules or bylaws is given subject
to condition of such rules or bylaws being made after previous
Basavraj Page|56
93.22-PIL+.docx
publication, then a draft of the proposed rules or bylaws for
information to persons likely to be affected needs to be
published. It further provides that after publication of draft
Notification, the competent authority shall consider any objection
or suggestion which may be received by the authority concerned
and it is only thereafter that the final Notification can be issued.
Thus, so far as the naming/renaming or altering the name of a
revenue area is concerned, then there exists, undisputedly a
statutory mechanism or framework under Section 4 of the MLRC.
However, as to whether Section 4 read with Section 2(43) of the
MLRC provides for a statutory mechanism / framework for
altering the name of a city is the issue which needs consideration
by the Court.
62. It is well settled principle of interpretation of statutes that
in case of any ambiguity in deriving the correct meaning of a
word or a phrase occurring in a statute, aid can be taken of the
heading or title prefixed to a section. Reference can be had in
this regard to a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Raichurmatham Prabhakar Vs. Rawatmal Dugar 11,
paragraph 14 whereof is quoted below:
(2004) 4 SCC 766
Basavraj Page|57
93.22-PIL+.docx
"14. The view is now settled that the headings or titles prefixed to sections
or group of sections can be referred to in construing an Act of the legislature.
But conflicting opinions have been expressed on the question as to what
weight should be attached to the headings or titles. According to one view,
the headings might be treated as preambles to the provisions following them
so as to be regarded as giving the key to opening the mind of the draftsman
of the clauses arranged thereunder. According to the other view, resort to
heading can only be taken when the enacting words are ambiguous. They
cannot control the meaning of plain words but they may explain ambiguities.
(See Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G.P. Singh, 9th Edn.,
2004, pp. 152 and 155.) In our opinion, it is permissible to assign the
heading or title of a section a limited role to play in the construction of
statutes. They may be taken as very broad and general indicators of the
nature of the subject-matter dealt with thereunder. The heading or title may
also be taken as a condensed name assigned to indicate collectively the
characteristics of the subject-matter dealt with by the enactment
underneath; though the name would always be brief having its own
limitations. In case of conflict between the plain language of the provision
and the meaning of the heading or title, the heading or title would not
control the meaning which is clearly and plainly discernible from the
language of the provision thereunder."
63. In Maqbool Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 12
Raichurmatham Prabhakar (supra) has been quoted with
approval. In paragraph 9 of the report in Maqbool (supra)
Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:
"9. The title to the provision need not invariably indicate the contents of
the provision. If the provision is otherwise clear and unambiguous, the title
pales into irrelevance. On the contrary, if the contents of the provision are
otherwise ambiguous, an aid can be sought from the title so as to define the
provision. In the event of a conflict between the plain expressions in the
provision and the indicated title, the title cannot control the contents of the
provision. Title is only a broad and general indication of the nature of the
subject dealt under the provision."
64. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tata Power Company Ltd. Vs.
Reliance Energy Limited & Ors. 13 Has laid down that chapter
headings and marginal notes are parts of the Statute as they
have also been enacted by the Legislature and there is no doubt
(2019) 11 SCC 395
(2009) 16 SCC 659
Basavraj Page|58
93.22-PIL+.docx
that it can be used in aid of construing a statute. Paragraphs
89, 90, 93 and 95 of the report are extracted hereunder:
89. Chapter headings and the marginal notes are parts of the statute.
They have also been enacted by Parliament. There cannot, thus, be any
doubt that it can be used in aid of the construction. It is, however, well
settled that if the wordings of the statutory provision are clear and
unambiguous, construction of the statute with the aid of "chapter heading"
and "marginal note" may not arise. It may be that heading and marginal
note, however, are of a very limited use in interpretation because of its
necessarily brief and inaccurate nature. They are, however, not irrelevant.
They certainly cannot be taken into consideration if they differ from the
material they describe.
90. We may notice some authorities on the subject at the outset. In
Bennion on Statutory Interpretation, 5th Edn., Section 255, it is stated:
"where general words are preceded by a heading indicating a narrower scope
it is legitimate to treat the general words as cut down by the heading".
Section 256 of the said treatise deals with "sidenote, heading or title",
wherein it is stated:
"Use in interpretation.--Like anything else in what Parliament puts
out as its Acts, a sidenote or heading is part of the Act, despite dicta
to the contrary. It may therefore be used by the interpreter. 'No Judge
can be expected to treat something which is before his eyes as though
it were not there'. However, the sidenote or section heading is of very
limited use in interpretation because of its necessarily brief and
therefore possibly inaccurate nature."
It was commented:
"If the sidenote contradicts the text this puts the interpreter on
inquiry; but the answer may be that the drafter chose an inadequate
signpost, or neglected to alter it to match an amendment made to the
clause during the passage of the Bill. Such facts are outside the
knowledge of the interpreter, who must therefore adopt a rule not
depending on them.
Modern Judges believe it proper to consider sidenotes or
headings to sections, and gather what guidance they can from them.
Thus Vinelott, J. said that the sidenote to the Income and Corporation
Taxes Act, 1970, Section 488 (repealed) was a permissible and useful
guide that threw light on the mischief at which the section was aimed.
Upjohn, L.J. gave a precisely accurate indication of the role of the
sidenote when he said:
'While the marginal note to a section cannot control the
language used in the section, it is at least permissible to approach a
consideration of its general purpose and the mischief at which it is
aimed with the note in mind.'
Basavraj Page|59
93.22-PIL+.docx
The italicised words accurately show the relationship of this
component to the informed interpretation rule. Earlier inconsistent
dicta, a selection of which are now considered, must be treated as
erroneous."
91. .......
92. ......
93. Chapter heading, therefore, is a permitted tool of interpretation. It is
considered to be a preamble of that section to which it pertains. It may be
taken recourse to where an ambiguity exists. However, where there does not
exist any ambiguity, it cannot be resorted to. Chapter heading and marginal
note, however, can be resorted to for the purpose of resolving the doubts.
94. ......
95. It is, however, evident from the decision of this Court in Indian
Aluminium Co. v. Kerala SEB [(1975) 2 SCC 414 : AIR 1975 SC 1967] that the
modern trend is to take into consideration the marginal note. It could be
used, as has been held, in STO v. Ajit Mills Ltd. [(1977) 4 SCC 98 : 1977 SCC
(Tax) 536] Relevance of marginal note was also taken note of in
RameshChand v. State of U.P. [(1979) 4 SCC 776] In Bombay Dyeing and Mfg.
Co. Ltd. (3) v. Bombay Environmental Action Group [(2006) 3 SCC 434]
marginal note has been taken into consideration as an intrinsic part of the
section. In Deewan Singh v. Rajendra Pd. Ardevi [(2007) 10 SCC 528 : (2007)
1 Scale 32] it has been held that the marginal note may be taken into
consideration for the purpose of proper construction of the provision although
there is no ambiguity. Sarabjit Rick Singh v. Union of India [(2008) 2 SCC
417 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 449] follows Deewan Singh [(2007) 10 SCC 528 :
(2007) 1 Scale 32] .
65. Section 4 of the MLRC is prefixed with the heading
"constitution of revenue areas". Apart from other revenue
areas it also empowers the State Government to constitute or
alter the limits of a village or to alter its name. It is on account
of occurrence of the word "villages" in Section 4(iv) of MLRC that
it has been argued on behalf of the Petitioners that since the
word "village" as per Section (2)(43) includes a town or a city as
well; hence Section 4 of the MLRC will be applied in its full force
Basavraj Page|60
93.22-PIL+.docx
for the purposes of altering the name of a city as well. However,
we have already noted above that a town or a city is the concept
distinct to the concept of a revenue area, in as much the concept
of a town or a city is intertwined with the concept of units of
local self-governance. Even otherwise Section 2 of the MLRC
commences with the phrase "unless the context otherwise
requires". Thus, it becomes ambiguous to deduce that village
will include a city or a town as well; having regard to the very
idea and concept of a city or a town as an urban local self-
governance unit.
66. In our opinion, on account of occurrence of the phrase
"context otherwise requires' in Section 2of the MLRC and
also because Section 4 of the said Act is prefixed with the
heading "constitution of revenue areas", reading a city or a
town in the phrase "village" occurring in Section 4 of the MLRC
will not be permissible. Section 4 clearly speaks about the
constitution of revenue areas. The context in which the word
"villages" occurs in Section 4 do not permit us to come to a
conclusion that even a city or a town will be included in the word
"village" occurring in Section 4.
Basavraj Page|61
93.22-PIL+.docx
67. As already noticed above, heading or title prefixed to a
section of a statute becomes crucial to interpret a particular
word or phrase occurring in the said section in case the meaning
of the said phrase or word is not clearly decipherable. Keeping
this principle of interpretation in view, we are of the considered
opinion that a city or a town cannot be read into the phrase
"village" occurring in Section 4 of the MLRC for the reason that
Section 4 of the MLRC is prefixed with the title "constitution of
revenue areas".
68. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, so far as naming / renaming
or altering the name of a city or a town is concerned, even the
provisions contained in Section 4 of the MLRC do not provide any
statutory framework.
69. As regard naming / renaming or altering the name of a
revenue area is concerned, Section 4 of the MLRC is
unequivocally clear according to which such alteration of name of
revenue area can be done after following the procedure as
prescribed in Sub Section (iv) of Section 4 of the MLRC.
70. Having reflected upon the issue as to whether any
Basavraj Page|62
93.22-PIL+.docx
statutory framework exists in altering the name of a city or
revenue area as above, we will now examine as to whether the
procedure prescribed for altering the name of revenue areas,
both in Aurangabad and Osmanabad in terms of the provisions
contained in Section 4 of the MLRC has been followed or not. It
is not in dispute that prior to issuance of final Notifications
renaming the revenue areas of Aurangabad and Osmanabad as
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv, respectively, a draft
Notification as per Section 4(4) of MLRC and Section 24 of the
General Clauses Act was issued inviting objections and
suggestions against the proposed alteration of name. It is also
not in dispute that such suggestions and objections were
considered and only then final Notifications in respect of various
revenue areas such as division, district, sub division, taluka and
village have been issued by the State Government.
71. A feeble attempt has been made by the Petitioners to
submit that though objections were raised to the proposed
alteration in the name of revenue areas pursuant to the draft
Notification issued under Section 4(4) of the MLRC, they have
not been considered or taken into account by the State
Government. Learned Advocate General has denied such
Basavraj Page|63
93.22-PIL+.docx
allegations and has submitted that due consideration was made
to the objections and suggestions received pursuant to the draft
Notification issued under Section 4(4) of the MLRC. Reasons for
accepting the objections or suggestions or rejecting the same is
an issue which in our opinion lies in the administrative realm of
the State Government as it is the competent authority of the
State Government which has to consider such objections and
suggestions. Once consideration has been made after issuance
of the draft Notification, we do not have any reason to disbelieve
that due consideration to such objections or suggestions were
not given by the State Government before issuing the final
Notifications.
72. Another argument based on Section 4(1)(vi) of the MLRC
has been raised on behalf of the Petitioners and the ground
taken in this regard is that the action to alter the name of a
revenue area can arise only in case of alteration of boundaries or
limits of any revenue area and not otherwise. In other words, it
has been argued on behalf of the Petitioners that power vested
under Section 4(1)(vi) of the MLRC in the State Government to
alter the name of revenue area is not independent; rather it is
dependent on the power to alter the limits or boundaries of such
Basavraj Page|64
93.22-PIL+.docx
revenue areas.
73. We have given our conscious consideration to the aforesaid
argument made by the learned Counsel representing the
Petitioners, however, we find ourselves unable to agree with
such submissions for the reason of the language in which Section
4(1)(vi) of the MLRC is couched. Section 4(1)(vi) empowers the
State Government to alter the limits of any such revenue area.
The occurrence of the word "such revenue area" at the first place
in the said provision refers to the revenue areas as specified in
sub clause (i)(ii)(iii)(iv) and (v) of Section 4(1) of the MLRC. It
even empowers the State Government to alter the limits of any
such revenue area which is constituted by amalgamation or
division or in any other manner whatsoever. The word
"whatsoever" is followed by a comma (,) and is further followed
by the words "or abolish any such revenue area". Occurrence of
the words "abolish any such revenue area" appearing in Section
4(1)(vi) relates to abolishing the revenue areas specified in sub
Section (i) to (v) of Section 4(1) of the Act. The provision for
empowering to alter the limits of revenue areas by
amalgamation or division specifically empowers the State
Government to abolish such a revenue area and further to name
Basavraj Page|65
93.22-PIL+.docx
it. The word "and" occurring after the words "or abolish any
such revenue area" and "may name" conjoins these two phrases
with the phrase which follows the word "and" i.e. "alter the name
of any such revenue area". Thus, once the limits of any such
revenue area is altered by amalgamation or its division or if it is
abolished, under Section 4(1)(vi) provides for such revenue area
with altered limits to be named afresh. The phrase occurring in
this provision "and alter the name of any such revenue area", in
our considered opinion, is related to all revenue areas specified
in clause (i) to (v) of Section 4(1) of the MLRC.
74. Even otherwise, in our opinion, the power of alteration of a
name of any object (in this case revenue areas) is intrinsic in the
power to name such an object. If an authority is empowered
under the statutory provisions to name a revenue area, there
cannot be any reason to deny such power to the same authority
for altering or changing its name. To this extent, we are also of
the opinion that issue of alteration of name of a revenue area or
even of a city or a town is not justiciable for the reason that the
courts lack the requisite tool to adjudicate such an issue in
absence of any judicially manageable or discoverable standard.
As to by what name a particular object is to be known cannot be
Basavraj Page|66
93.22-PIL+.docx
judicially reviewed unless the name so proposed is atrocious.
The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Mustaq
Ahemad (supra) has already repelled the argument that the
State Government is empowered to alter the name of a revenue
area only in case of alteration of its limits by amalgamation or
division and to the said extent we are in respectful agreement
with the view taken by the Division Bench in the said case.
75. Thus, we have no hesitation to conclude that so far as the
challenge made by the Petitioners to rename the revenue areas
of Aurangabad and Osmanabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
and Dharashiv, respectively, is concerned, the statutory
provisions contained in Section 4 of the MLRC have been
followed and in absence of any procedural flaw, we are unable to
subscribe to the submissions made by the Petitioners.
76. We shall now deal with the challenge made to the
impugned Notification, whereby, names of Aurangabad and
Osmanabad cities have been changed to Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv.
77. We have concluded above on the basis of discussions
Basavraj Page|67
93.22-PIL+.docx
already made that for naming/renaming or altering the name of
a city there does not exist any statutory framework. The
submission based on Section 4 and Section 2(43) of the MLRC
for asserting that even for changing the name of a city or a town
the procedure as prescribed under Section 4 of the MLRC should
be followed, has already been considered and repelled by us.
Though adherence to the guidelines issued by the Central
Government, dated 11th September 1953 has been pleaded on
behalf of the State - Respondents by saying that the guidelines
have been followed, however, the Petitioners have failed to point
out any statutory provision to which such guidelines can be said
to be referable. The guidelines appear to have been issued by
the Central Government for general guidance and are general in
nature and hence any consideration of the opinion and material
provided by the State Government to the Central Government on
the basis of which No-Objection Certificate has been issued by
the Central Government, in our opinion, need not be gone into.
78. Two provisions of the Maharashtra General Clauses Act,
1904, which are relevant for our discussion in this matter, may
also be referred to. Section 14 of the Act of 1904 provides that
if by any Act any power is conferred on the Government then
Basavraj Page|68
93.22-PIL+.docx
that power may be exercised from time to time as the occasion
requires. Section 14 of the Act of 1904 is quoted hereunder:
"14. Where, by any Bombay Act or Maharashtra Act made after the
commencement of this Act any power is conferred on any Government, then
that power may be exercised from time to time as occasion requires."
79. Section 21 of the Act of 1904 states that where, by any
Act, a power to issue notifications, orders, rules or by-laws is
conferred, then that power includes a power to add, to amend,
to vary or rescind any notifications, orders, rules or by-laws so
issued. Section 21 of the Act of 1904 runs as under:
"21. Where, by any Bombay Act or Maharashtra Act, a power to issue
notifications, orders, rules or by-laws is conferred, then that power includes a
power, exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like sanction and
conditions (if any), to add to, amend, vary or rescind any notifications,
orders, rules or by-laws, so issued."
80. Thus, Section 14 as quoted above deals with exercise of a
power from time to time as and when any such occasion arises.
Section 21 provides that power to issue notifications, or rules or
power to make orders under an enactment includes the power to
amend, to add, to vary or rescind such notification/ order/ rules/
by-laws. The provisions of Section 21 of the Act of 1904
primarily contain a rule or interpretation and accordingly, if we
apply the said principle enunciated in Section 21 read with
Section 14 of the Act of 1904, our conclusion is that the power
conferred on the State Government under Section 4 of the MLRC
Basavraj Page|69
93.22-PIL+.docx
to name a revenue area by issuing a notification will include the
power to alter or vary the same as well.
81. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shree Sidhbali
Steels Ltd. v. State of U. P.14, while dealing with somewhat
similar provisions contained in Sections 14 and 21 of the Uttar
Pradesh General Clauses Act, has held that the principle laid
down in Section 21 is of general application and the power to
rescind mentioned in Section 21 is without limitations or
conditions. It has further been held that it was not a power so
limited as to be exercised only once. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court has further held that by virtue of Sections 14 and 21 of the
Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act when a power is conferred on
an authority to do a particular act, such power shall include
power to withdraw, modify or amend or cancel the notification
earlier issued. Law in this regard has been summarized by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shree Sidhbali Steels Ltd. (supra)
which is extracted hereinbelow:
36. It may be mentioned that the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 was
enacted by Parliament to provide for the rationalisation of the production and
supply of electricity and generally for taking measures conducive to electrical
development. The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 being a Central Act, the
provisions of Sections 14 and 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 would be
applicable. Section 14 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 reads as under:
2011 SCC OnLine SC 213
Basavraj Page|70
93.22-PIL+.docx
"14. Powers conferred to be exercisable from time to time .--
(1) Where, by any Central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of
this Act, any power is conferred, then, unless a different intention appears,
that power may be exercised from time to time as occasion requires.
(2) This section applies also to all Central Acts and Regulations made on or
after the fourteenth day of January, 1887."
Whereas Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 reads as under:
"21. Power to issue, to include power to add to, amend, vary or
rescind, notifications, orders, rules or bye-laws.--
Where, by any Central Act or Regulation, a power to issue notifications,
orders, rules or bye-laws is conferred, then that power includes a power,
exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like sanction and conditions
(if any) to add to, amend, vary or rescind any notifications, orders, rules or
bye-laws so issued."
37. Section 14 deals with the exercise of a power successively and has no
relevance to the question whether the power claimed can at all be conferred.
By Section 14 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, any power conferred by any
Central enactment may be exercised from time to time as occasion arises,
unless a different intention appears in the Act. There is no different intention
in the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. Therefore, the power to issue a
notification under Section 49 of the Act of 1948, can be exercised from time to
time if circumstances so require.
38. Section 21 is based on the principle that power to create includes the
power to destroy and also the power to alter what is created. Section 21,
amongst other things, specifically deals with power to add to, amend, vary or
rescind the notifications. The power to rescind a notification is inherent in the
power to issue the notification without any limitations or conditions. Section 21
embodies a rule of construction. The nature and extent of its application must
be governed by the relevant statute which confers the power to issue the
notification, etc. However, there is no manner of doubt that the exercise of
power to make subordinate legislation includes the power to rescind the same.
This is made clear by Section 21. On that analogy an administrative decision is
revocable while a judicial decision is not revocable except in special
circumstances. Exercise of power of a subordinate legislation will be
prospective and cannot be retrospective unless the statute authorises such an
exercise expressly or by necessary implication.
39. The principle laid down in Section 21 is of general application. The
power to rescind mentioned in Section 21 is without limitations or conditions.
It is not a power so limited as to be exercised only once. The power can be
exercised from time to time having regard to the exigency of time. When by a
Central Act power is given to the State Government to give some relief by way
of concession and/or rebate to newly-established industrial units by a
notification, the same can be curtailed and/or withdrawn by issuing another
notification under the same provision and such exercise of power cannot be
faulted on the ground of promissory estoppel.
Basavraj Page|71
93.22-PIL+.docx
40. It would be profitable to remember that the purpose of the General
Clauses Act is to place in one single statute different provisions as regards
interpretations of words and legal principles which would otherwise have to be
specified separately in many different Acts and Regulations. Whatever the
General Clauses Act says whether as regards the meaning of words or as
regards legal principles, has to be read into every statute to which it applies.
Further, power to curtail and/or withdraw the notification issued under Section
49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 giving rebate is implied under Section
49 itself on proper interpretation of Section 21 of the General Clauses Act.
Therefore, this Court is of the firm opinion that, power to curtail and/or
withdraw the notification issued under Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply)
Act, 1948, granting certain benefits, was available to the Respondents.
41. By virtue of Sections 14 and 21 of the General Clauses Act, when a
power is conferred on an authority to do a particular act, such power can be
exercised from time to time and carries with it the power to withdraw, modify,
amend or cancel the notifications earlier issued, to be exercised in the like
manner and subject to like conditions, if any, attached with the exercise of the
power. It would be too narrow a view to accept that chargeability once fixed
cannot be altered. Since the charging provision in the Electricity (Supply) Act,
1948 is subject to the State Government's power to issue notification under
Section 49 of the Act granting rebate, the State Government, in view of
Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, can always withdraw, rescind, add to or
modify an exemption notification. No industry can claim as of right that the
Government should exercise its power under Section 49 and offer rebate and
it is for the Government to decide whether the conditions are such that rebate
should be granted or not."
82. In view of the aforesaid principle laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court based on the purport of Sections 14 and 21 of
the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, we are of the opinion
that since Sections 14 and 21 of the Act of 1904 are similarly
worded, the power to name a revenue area in terms of Section
4(1)(vi) of the MLRC will include the power to alter or vary the
same as well.
83. Much emphasis has been laid by the learned Counsel for
the Petitioners on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay (supra). In this
Basavraj Page|72
93.22-PIL+.docx
regard, we may observe that a Writ Petition was filed by Ashwini
Kumar Upadhyay before the Hon'ble Supreme Court with the
prayers that the Home Minister of the Government of India be
directed to constitute a "Renaming Commission" to find out
"original" names of ancient historical, cultural and religious
places which were named by foreign invaders to maintain
sovereignty and to secure right to dignity, right to religion and
right to culture.
Another prayer made in the said Writ Petition was that the
Archaeological Survey of India be directed to conduct research
and publish the initial names of historical, cultural and religious
places, which were renamed by foreign invaders. The Petitioner
had also prayed that the direction be issued to the Central and
State Governments to update their records and mention the
"original" names of ancient historical, cultural and religious
places. It is in the background of these prayers that certain
observations have been made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and
the reliefs prayed for in the said Writ Petition have been denied
and accordingly, the observations are to be read and understood
in the context in which they were made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. However, in the instant case, the prayer is not for
Basavraj Page|73
93.22-PIL+.docx
renaming; rather challenge is to the Notifications issued by the
State Government whereby the names of cities and revenue
areas have been changed. The said change, as observed above,
so far as renaming the revenue area is concerned has
precipitated on account of Notifications issued by the State
Government in terms of the statutory scheme embodied in
Section 4 of the MLRC. Thus, we are of the opinion that though
there cannot be any quarrel with the observations made by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay (supra),
however, the same cannot be taken aid of for acceding to the
prayers made in these Writ Petitions which primarily are for
quashing the impugned Notifications.
84. It has also been urged by the learned Counsel appearing
for the Petitioners, rather emphatically, that the judgment of the
coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Mustaq
Ahemad (supra) needs to be revisited. However, we do not
find any force in the said submission for the reason, firstly, that
Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) holds that power to rename
or alter the name of a revenue area under Section 4 of the MLRC
is independent of the power to alter the boundaries of such
revenue areas. We have already expressed our respectful
Basavraj Page|74
93.22-PIL+.docx
agreement with the said view taken in Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad
(supra).
And secondly, as far as the submission that Section 4(vi) of
the MLRC will apply in respect of change of name of city is
concerned, we find that the said observations were made by the
Division Bench in Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) on the basis
of the statement made before Court by the learned Government
Pleader that as per the definition of "village" given in Section
2(3) of the MLRC, "village" includes a town or a city and it is in
these circumstances the judgment in the case of Mohd. Mustaq
Ahemad (supra) observes that, "therefore, section 4 is a
declaration of executive power of the State to name or rename
of any revenue area either be it division, district, sub division,
taluka or a village which includes town or city". However, while
making such declaration various provisions including the
provisions of Act of 1949, Act of 1965 and Part IX-A of the
Constitution of India, were not placed before the Court, neither
these provisions have been discussed. Accordingly, in the facts
of the present case, we are of the considered opinion that
Mohd. Mustaq Ahemad (supra) does not constitute a binding
precedent for want of consideration of various statutory and
Basavraj Page|75
93.22-PIL+.docx
constitutional provisions; neither does it require a re-visit by this
Court.
(F) CONCLUSION:
85. In view of the discussions made and reasons given, we
have no hesitation to conclude that the impugned Notifications
issued by the State Government renaming Aurangabad and
Osmanabad cities as Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv
cities and the revenue areas of Aurangabad and Osmanabad to
revenue areas as Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv, do
not suffer from any illegality or any other legal vice and thus, no
interference in the impugned Notifications is warranted.
86. The petitions, being bereft of any merit, are hereby
dismissed.
87. However, there will be no order as to costs.
88. All interim applications stand disposed of.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
Basavraj Page|76
