DASONDHA SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal arises out of a suit by the residents of three villages challenging the levy of a sum of Rs. 15,540/- on account of expenses incurred in posting punitive police in the three villages of Ajitwal, Dhudike and Chuhar Chak. The plaintiffs' suit was a suit for injunction. It was decreed by the trial Court on the ground that certain irregularities of procedure invalidated the levy On appeal the learned Senior Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit with costs throughout. The plaintiffs have come up in second appeal to this Court.

(2.) A punitive police post was stationed in these three villages during the period august 1950 to July 1951. The notification required by Section 15 of the Police Act was published in the Punjab Government Gazette of 25-8-1950. This notification provided that the proclamation would be further notified by being posted on (1)Court House at Moga; (2) Post Offices at Chuhar Chak, Dhudike and. Ajitwal; (3) Police Station at Mehna; and (4) Patwarkhanas of Chuhar Chak, Dhudike and ajitwal. The contention of the plaintiffs was that no proper notification in the manner laid down was, in fact, made and, therefore, the levy was illegal. It has been found by the lower appellate Court, and this finding is binding upon me, that there was, in fact, no posting of the proclamations at the Patwarkhanas and the Post Offices. Therefore, the sole question before me is whether this omission invalidates the entire proceedings. The contention of the State has throughout been that the provisions of Section 15 with regard to the notification of the proclamation are directory and not mandatory. This is the view taken by the lower appellate Court.

(3.) A reading of the Police Act shows that the State Government is the sole judge of whether there is need for posting additional police in any particular area which is found to be in a disturbed or dangerous state. The Police Act makes no provision for calling objections and for hearing the residents of the area in which the police is to be posted; Even an absentee landlord may be required to pay his share of the cost. The State Government has the right of exempting any person or body of persons from the liability. From this it is clear that it is not essential to inform the villagers before they can be asked to pay the expenses of the additional police. Notice is usually necessary only if the person to whom the notice is issued has the right of showing cause against it. This is clearly not the intention of the Police Act with regard to the posting of additional police. Again we see that Section 15 gives the State Government no option in the matter of one manner of notification. The proclamation has to be notified in the Official gazette but with regard to any other means the State Government is given full liberty and if the State Government so chooses it may content itself with publication in the Official Gazette alone. Therefore, that part of Section 15 which requires the State Government to notify the proclamation "in such other manner as the State Government shall direct" is dearly not mandatory and failure to comply with this portion of Section 15 wilt not render the proceedings invalid in any way. Maxwell while discussing the imperative or directory nature of a statutory enactment observes at page 374 of Interpretation of Statutes, Edn. 10