BHUBANESHWAR PRASAD SINGH Vs. GARULIA MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule was issued by Bose J. (sic) on the opposite parties to show cause why a writ (sic) calling up (sic) mandamus and/or certiorari should not issue in the nature of solutions dated January 30, 1951, February 14, 1951, and June 13, 1951 and the assessment based on these resolution should not be cancelled and/or quashed or why such other appropriate writ or writs or directions or orders under Article 226(1) of the Constitution should not issue and why such other or further orders should not be made as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

(2.) The Petitioner is Sri Bhubaneshwar Prosad Singh on behalf of Messrs. B.P. Singh and Bros. The opposite parties to the Rule are the chairman and the commissioners of the Garulia Municipality.

(3.) In the petition it is alleged that the Petitioner is a proprietor of the said firm B.P. Singh and Bros. It states that the Garulia Municipality was superseded by a notification published under Section 553 of the Bengal Municipal Act. The notification is dated January 20, 1949. It had the effect of superseding the Garulia Municipality from January 2, 1949 to December 31, 1950. By another notification the Subdivisional Officer, Barrackpore, was empowered to perform the functions of the chairman and the commissioners of the Municipality under Section 554(1)(6) of the Bengal Municipal Act. The petition states that on a representation made by one Nirmal Ghose purporting to act on behalf of himself and certain other persons addressed to the Minister, Local Self-Government, it was directed that a copy of the said representation be forwarded to the Subdivisional officer for report. Thereupon, certain correspondence passed and it appears that, before the matter was finally disposed of, there was a fresh election of the commissioners of the municipality on December 16, 1950, that thereupon, on January 30, 1951, the chairman and commissioners of the municipality passed a resolution appointing certain persons as members of the assessment committee. Later on, on February 14, 1951, another resolution was passed by the chairman and the commissioners of the municipality appointing an assessor for the purpose of valuing certain holdings in ward No. 1 belonging to the Petitioner. The resolution refers to a letter dated October 12, 1950, received from the Local Self-Government and a memorandum of the District Magistrate regarding revision of all holdings of the Petitioner. Thereafter, on June 13, 1951, the annual value of the said holdings of the Petitioner was confirmed at a meeting of the chairman and the commissioners of the municipality by a resolution purporting to have been passed under Section 138(1)(c) of the Bengal Municipal Act. The resolution stated that the assessment was to take effect from the (sic) second quarter of 1951-52. Thereafter the Petitioner moved this Court and obtained the aforesaid Rule.