SACHINDRA NATH BANERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against a resolution dated February 20, 1966, passed by the Commissioner of the Joynagar -Majilpur Municipality enhancing the rate of holdings from 5 to 10%. The Petitioners Nos. 1 and 4 and Respondents Nos. 4 to 11 are the Commissioners of the Municipality and Petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 5 are some of the rate -payers thereof. They challenge the validity of the resolution enhancing the rate on two grounds, which have been urged at the hearing, as follows:

(2.) So far as the first point is concerned, the controversy centres round the validity of the special meeting held on May 22, 1966, upon which the Petitioners rely. It appears that 4 of the II members of the Municipality first requested the Chairman of the Municipality to convene a special meeting under Sec. 78 of the Act to consider the hardship caused by the enhancement of the rate in question. This notice was duly served upon the remaining Commissioners as required by law. But the Chairman or the Vice -Chairman having failed to convene the special meeting as required in the proposal, the conveners resorted to the provision of Sub -section (2) of Sec. 78 of the Act and proposed to hold a special meeting on May 22, 1966, at 4 -30 p.m., at the municipal office to discuss, inter alia, the impugned resolution and to have it rescinded on the ground of hardship etc. A resolution of rescission was eventually passed by five of the Commissioners.

(3.) The Respondents urged that the proceedings of the special meeting were invalid inasmuch as it was held on May 22, 1966, which was declared a municipal holiday by the Vice -Chairman on account of the death of the Chairman which took place in the meantime. The order in question is at annEx. P to the counter -affidavit which says - -