LAWS(CAL)-1973-9-18

SAILENDRA NATH BHOWMIK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Decided On September 25, 1973
SAILENDRA NATH BHOWMIK Appellant
V/S
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from a judgment of Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. by which he discharged the Rule nisi issued on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The application was made by the Commissioners of the Ranigunj Municipality seeking to have a notification issued by the Government of West Bengal in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 67-A of the Bengal Municipal Act 1932 rescinded by a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ. The instant appeal has been preferred by the Commissioners of the said Municipality questioning the correctness of the order dismissing the Writ petition.

(2.) The appellants were elected as commissioners of the Ranigunj Municipality in May, 1967. At a meeting held sometime in June, 1967 the Commissioners elected the office bearers of the Municipality and the first and the second appellant were respectively elected the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman of the Municipality. The appellants' term of office as Commissioners and office bearers was to expire on June 29, 1971 but by a notification dated March 19, 1971 it was extended till December 31, 1971. By the impugned notification No. 3871/MIM-48/71, dated August 16, 1971 the Governor, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 67-A of the Bengal Municipal Act 1932, was pleased to declare that the Ranigunj Municipality "shall have an Executive Officer for the period of one year with effect from the date on which the Executive Officer may assume charge of his office" and to confer on the said Executive Officer "all the powers of the Chairman and the Commissioners under the said Act, whether excrcisable at a meeting or otherwise." One Amulya Kumar Roy, Special Officer grade II under the Local Self Government Department, was appointed the Executive Officer by the said notification. It appears from the notification that the powers conferred by the said Section 67-A were invoked as the Government was of opinion that the affairs of the Ranigunj Municipality were not properly managed and the Government considered it desirable in the public interest to declare that the said municipality should have an Executive Officer.

(3.) It appears from the supplementary affidavit filed before us on behalf of the appellants, affirmed on August 25, 1972 by appellant No. 7. a Commissioner of the Municipality, that the term of office of the Commissioners of Ranigunj Municipality was extended upto June 29, 1973 and the tenure of the Executive Officer was also extended for the said period.