SUNDER LAL Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, REWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal arises in the following circumstances. The plaintiff applied for a licence under Section 121 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 , for running a copper and rolling mill in Mohalla Chaudhri Wara, Rewari, on 11th May, 1949 and deposited licence fee of Rs. 10 on 16th May, 1949. The Municipal Committee in its meeting held on 5th June, 1949 passed a resolution by a majority that the licence should be granted to the applicant. On 28th June, 1949 the Municipal Committee issued a notice to the owners of this mill under Section 195-A directing them to stop constructing building. It appears that on 10th July, 1949 the Municipal Committee resolved that notice be given to the plaintiff and others under Section 220 of the Punjab Municipal Act for demolition of the construction within six hours and also resolved that no licence should be issued to them. Thereupon the present suit was filed on 12th July, 1949 for a permanent injunction against the Municipal Committee, Rewari, restraining it from enforcing to notice under Section 195-A and the notice under Section 220 and the plaintiff further prayed that the Municipal Committee should be directed to grant licence to the plaintiff Sunder Lal. After the suit had been filed, the Deputy Commissioner wrote a letter to the Municipal Committee on 25th of July, 1949 advising it not to implement the resolution, dated 5th June, 1949, on various grounds and thereupon the Committee by resolution dated 14th August, 1949 revoked the resolution of 5th June, 1949 resolving that the licence be not granted. On 30th August, 1949 the Deputy Commissioner again wrote to the Municipal Committee that if the Committee had in the meanwhile granted to the plaintiff and others a licence, then that licence be suspended. About a year later, the Commissioner set aside the above order of the Deputy Commissioner, dated 30th August, 1949, on the ground that in as much as no formal licence had been issued it was not necessary to pass that order. This order was passed by the Commissioner under Section 235 of the Punjab Municipal Act. Both the lower Courts dismissed the plaintiff's suit and the plaintiff has come to this Court in second appeal.

(2.) It appears that during the trial, the counsel for the Municipal Committee made a statement on 1st August, 1949 that the Municipal Committee will not demolish the construction in pursuance of the notices under Section 195-A and Section 220 of the Act and in view of that statement it was not necessary to deal with the first relief claimed by the plaintiff in the present suit to the effect that these notices should be held to be mala fide and ultra vires and I do not consider it necessary to deal with this aspect of the suit in this judgment.

(3.) The main point involved in the present case is whether the resolution of 5th June, 1949 could be revoked by the Municipal Committee on 14th August, 1949 and whether the Municipal Committee was not bound to grant a licence in pursuance of the resolution dated 5th June, 1949. Now Section 121 of the Punjab Municipal Act reads -