MUNICIPAL BOARD DEORIA Vs. RAI SURENDRA NATH SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant's second appeal in suit for declaration. The appellant is the Municipal Board, Deoria, which was impleaded as the first defendant along with the State of Uttar Pradesh as the second de fendants, in the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent Rai Surendra Nath Sinha, for a declaration that his dismissal from the post of the Secretary of the appellant, Municipal Board, Deoria, by order of the State Government dated 12th March, 1965, communicated by the president of the Municipal Board, Deoria on 23rd March, 1965, was illegal, unwarranted and of no effect and that the plaintiff continues as before to be the Secretary of the first defendant, Municipal Board, Deoria, and entitles to all his rights, salaries and privileges. THIS suit was decreed by the trial court in the following terms: "The suit of the plaintiff for a declaration to the effect that the order dated 12-3-65 dismissing him from services as secretary of the defendant No. 1 is illegal and inoperative and that the plaintiff still continues to be the secretary of the defendant No. 1 and is entitled, as such, to all his salaries and rights and privileges, is decreed with costs, and the declaration is hereby made accordingly." A very strange and unusual objection was taken before the lower appellate court on behalf of the plaintiff respondent in the first appeal filed by the defendant Municipal Board; the objection being that the defendant Municipal Board had no right of appeal as the State Government had acquiesced in the decree. More strangely, the objection prevailed with the lower appellate court and it held that the defendant Municipal Board had no right of appeal and dismissed the appeal on that ground. The order of the lower appellate court is, on the face of it perverse. It cannot be disputed that the defendant Municipal Board was party to the suit. The relief on declaration was claimed against it also and decreed too. The declaration went to the extent of saying that the plaintiff respondent continued to be the Secretary of the defendant Municipal Board and was entitled to all his salaries and privileges.' On the face of such a declaration by the decree it is impossible to say that the defendant Municipal Board was not a person adversely affected by the decree. The appeal is fit to be allowed and the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court is liable to be set aside. The Civil Appeal No. 73 of 1967 is liable to be remanded to the Court of District Judge, Deoria for rehearing on merits; but in view of the proviso for rehearing S. 6 of the U. P. Public Services (Tribunals) Act, 1976, it has to be remanded to the Services Tribunals. I allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of the court of Civil Judge, Deoria in Civil Appeal No. 73 of 1967 and remand the said appeal for being heard on merits by the tribunal appointed by the State Government under that provision. The costs shall abide the results.