SANJAY GOVIND SAPKAL Vs. COLLECTOR OF DHULE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these petitions have been placed for hearing before a Full Bench on a reference being made by a Division Bench consisting of one of us (B. H. Marllapale, J.) and N. H. Patil, J. In all the three petitions, a common question of law has been raised viz. , the extent of power, authority and jurisdiction of the Collector under sub-section (1) of section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") to suspend an order or resolution passed by a Municipal Council.

(2.) TO appreciate the controversy raised in the present group of petitions, few relevant facts in the first matter i. e. Writ Petition No. 1928 of 1996, Sanjay Govind Sapkal and others v. The Collector of Dhule and others, may be stated.

(3.) THE said petition was filed by fourteen petitioners claimed to have been appointed by Municipal Council, Dhule, respondent No. 2 herein. The President of respondent No. 2-Council made several appointments between November 30, 1988 and December 21, 1989 as peons, clerks, cleaners, gardeners, etc. The Chief Officer of the Municipal Council, vide his letter No. Estt/974/89-90 dated December 12, 1989, informed the Collector, Dhule, respondent No. 1 herein that the President, Dhule Municipal Council had made certain appointments which were not in consonance with law. Respondent No. 1-Collector, considering the above communication of the Chief Officer of the Municipal Council passed an order in exercise of power under sub-section (1) of section 308 of the Act suspending the appointments and ordering removal of those persons from service with immediate effect. Similar orders were passed by the Commissioner and consequential actions were taken by the Chief Officer.