RAVINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel on both sides. The Municipal Committee, Nurmahal, District Jullundur in the State of Punjab, by a resolution dated 24/12/19844, decided to extend the outer limits of its jurisdiction and a resolution (No. 6 to that effect was passed on that day. The appellant had submitted his objections to the Committee. After considering the objections and having overruled the same, the Committee recommended to the government for issuance of a notification extending the outer limit in the municipal area in resolution No. 39. The government published a notification under Section 5 (1 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (for short 'the Act') in the State Gazette on 16/2/1987. Thereafter, the Municipal Committee, by beat of drum, published a notification in the municipal area and the extension has become effective under Section 5 thereof. Calling in question the legality thereof, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. 3310 of 1987 in the High court. The Punjab and Haryana High court by its order dated 19-9-1988 dismissed the writ petition with the following finding:

(3.) Shri V. C. Mahajan, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, placing reliance on the decision of another division bench of that High court reported in Municipal Committee, Dhariwal v. Gram Sabha, Village Rania contended that unless the State government prescribes another mode of publication as indicated under Section 5 of the Act, the provisions of Section 5 shall not be put into operation and that, therefore, the division bench was wrong in accepting the contention of the respondents that publication by beat of drum done by the municipal area (sic) was valid in law. He also further contended that no such publication, as a fact, was effected. Section 5 (1 of the Act reads thus: