No-confidence motion against Mundhe suspended

Indicating support to Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe, the Maharashtra government on Wednesday ‘suspended’ the no-confidence motion passed against him by the civic body.

“The no-confidence motion has been suspended by the state government and the (Navi Mumbai) mayor has been asked to submit a response in 30 days as to why the civic body took such an action,” an official in the Chief Minister’s Office said.

On October 25, the NCP-controlled NMMC passed the motion at a special meeting chaired by mayor Sudhakar Sonawane. During the meeting, Mundhe was present in the House. While BJP corporators had opposed the motion, its ally in the Maharashtra government Shiv Sena had joined hands with NCP and Congress and supported the motion.

The motion was then sent to the Urban Development department of the Maharashtra government, which is headed by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis himself.  

“Targeting an officer for doing his duty, exposing irregularities and preventing wrong happenings is absolutely wrong,” Fadnavis had said indicating his support to Mundhe while speaking with a group of scribes. Mundhe was accused of “undemocratic functioning” even though his drive against illegal constructions, allegedly linked to politicians, has earned him backing from citizens.

Terming the state government’s decision as “extremely unfortunate” Sonawane said, “This decision was definitely avoidable by the government as this clearly violates the provisions of Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act (BPMCA). The elected representatives across the party lines voted against him.” 

He alleged that the IAS officer has been exercising his executive powers “absolutely autocratically” and almost all the decisions taken by him have landed in controversy and therefore court have given stay in many of them. 

Asked what would be his further course of action, the NCP leader said, “There are several ways available in a democracy. We resorted the first one (bringing no-confidence motion) and the second one is to challenge it in court as major provisions of BPMCA have been violated. We would definitely think about the second option.”