SURJIT MEHTA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REPLICATION taken on the record.

(2.) ARGUMENTS heard. Surjit Mehta and four others President and office bearers of the Municipal Committee, Yamuna Nagar have filed this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for quashing order of the Deputy Commissioner dated March 3, 1992 Annexure P/1 vide which Deputy Commissioner in exercise of the powers conferred under S. 246 of the Haryana Municipal Act has suspended the execution of the resolution passed by the Municipal Committee, Yamuna Nagar on January 30, 1992 and further ordered prohibiting the doing of any act which was about to be done or was being done in pursuance of the aforesaid resolution. A meeting of the Municipal Committee, in fact, was held on January 30, 1992. According to the petitioners some of the members left the meeting and the remaining 18 members passed the resolution which is Annexure P-2. The stand of the respondents is that in fact meeting was called, however, there was commotion in the meeting and members exchanged blows and ultimately dispersed. No meeting was held in the premises of the Municipal Committee. Subsequently proceedings were prepared and got signed by the members by taking the register to their respective houses. An inquiry was also held and as per report of the Enquiry Officer, no meeting of the Committee took place and the resolution Annexure P-2 was in fact not passed and the Deputy Commissioner was, thus, justified in suspending the resolution by passing the impugned order.

(3.) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the view that S. 246 of the Haryana Municipal Act was not attracted to the case in hand, and the Deputy Commissioner could not suspend the resolution passed by the Municipal Committee. S. 246 of the Act is reproduced as under :-