HINABEN R CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. In the facts and the circumstances of this case, the petition is taken up for final disposal today and the learned advocates for the parties have been heard at length.

(2.) . This petition by a former president of the Nadiad Municipality challenges the order dated 27th November, 2001 [ Annexure A ] passed by the Director of Municipalities under Section 70 [1] of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 [ " the Act " for brevity ] requiring the petitioner to pay the municipality a sum of Rs.1,00,989.00.

(3.) . The petitioner was elected as a councillor of Nadiad Municipality for the period between 1994 to 1999. The petitioner was elected as the President of the Municipality for the period between 10.1.1998 and 10.1.1999. By the notice dated 27.7.1999, the Director of Municipalities , Gujarat State [ " the Director " for brevity ] called upon the petitioner to show cause why the petitioner should not be required to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,989.00 to the Municipality on the ground that the petitioner had caused the loss of the said amount to the Municipality by employing 20 daily rated employees for collection of tax and octroi for the period between December 199 8/03/1999. It was also alleged that before making such appointment of employees on fixed salary basis, the petitioner had not taken prior permission of the competent authority and had run the administration in an arbitrary manner. Hence, the aforesaid notice was issued under Section 70 of the Gujarat Municipality Act, 1963 [ hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ].