HARIHAR PRASAD TRIPATHI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MIRZAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Harihar Prasad Tripathi, is a Bakshi in the Town Area, Kachhwa, constituted under the U.P. Town Areas Act (hereinafter called the Act). There was a Town Area Committee, which looked after the affairs of the Town Area. By a notification dated, August 3, 1960, and published in the U. P. Gazette, dated August 13, 1960, the State Government, in exercise of its powers under Section 36 (1) of the Act, made an order superseding the Town Area Committee for a period of two years, or till the next general election whichever was earlier. A copy of the notification superseding the Committee is annexure D to the affidavit accompanying the writ petition. On October 6, 1960 the petitioner received an order, dated October 1, 1960, from the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, suspending him pending conclusion of an enquiry against him. A charge sheet signed by the District Magistrate was also served upon him. The petitioned was asked by the District Magistrate to submit his reply to the charges by October, 14, 1960, On October 13, 1960, the petitioner submitted his reply. So far no further action has been taken and disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner are still pending. It is at this stage that the petitioner has rushed up to this Court for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the District Magistrate has no power to initiate any disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner. He supports his contention in two ways.

(3.) Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Act provides that the Chairman of the Committee shall appoint the permanent staff subject in the Case of the Bakshi to the approval of the prescribed authority or, if none is appointed, the District Magistrate. Sub-section (2) thereof provides that the Chairman may fine, suspend or dismiss any member of the permanent staff so appointed subject, in the case of the dismissal of any member of the staff, whose pay exceeds Rs. 30/- per month, to confirmation by the prescribed authority, or, if none is appointed, the District Magistrate. It is admitted that no prescribed authority has been appointed. Sub-section (1) of Section 36 of the Act empowers the State Government to make an order superseding a Town Area Committee for a period not exceeding two years, if the State Government is of opinion that the Committee persistently makes default in the performance of the duties imposed on it by or under this Or any other Act, or exceeds or abuses its powers. Sub-section (2) thereof specifies consequences of supersession of a Committee. It may be set out here: