N RANGANATHAN PILLAI Vs. COMMISSIONER CUDDALORE MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant herein was a permanent Upper Division Clerk of the. Cuddalora municipality. In January 1954 quinquennial revision of the property tax of the municipality took place. The rules of the Municipality provide for revision petitions being filed to the Commissioner against the orders of the authority levying the property tax and further appeals to the Municipal Councils from the orders passed by the Commissioner. In August. 1955 six charges were framed against the appellant, the main charge being that he was mainly responsible for tampering with the dates of service of the orders of the Commissioner upon tax payers as entered in the books of the Municipality, and that such tampering has taken place with the ulterior object of enabling the assessees to prefer appeals to the municipal Council even though the time prescribed under the rules had expired. After the framing of the charges the usual enquiry was conducted and the commissioner found the appellant guilty of all the charges. The appellant was reduced to the rank of a lower division clerk from the upper division clerk's post, and he was also placed at the minimum scale of pay in the lower division. The appellant preferred an appeal to the Inspector of Local Boards. The punishment was modified by his being placed at the top of the lower division for one year.

(2.) THE appellant preferred W. P. No. 512 of 1959 for quashing this order of the municipal Commissioner, on the ground that the proceedings before the Municipal commissioner were conducted contrary to principles of natural justice, and that the appellant has not been givers an adequate opportunity to establish his innocence. The learned Judge did not accept the contention and dismissed the writ petition, and hence the present appeal.

(3.) THE only point that was urged by learned counsel for the appellant was based upon rule No. 4 relating to the appointment and punishment of officers and servants of Municipal Councils, G. O. No. 3648 L. S. G. dated 18-8- 1936. The portion of the rule relevant for the purpose of the present appeal is as follows :