HARI CHAND Vs. D R BAWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The fate of this case hinges on the decision of a fairly simple question - Whether the Executive Officer, Municipal Committee, Karnal, respondent No. 1, had the authority and jurisdiction in law to suspend and demote the plaintiff-appellant, an Octroi Moharrir, whose basic salary was more than Rs. 45/- per mensem ?

(2.) Hari Chand, Octroi Moharrir, Municipal Committee, Karnal, filed a suit against Shri D.R. Bawa, Executive Officer, Municipal Committee, Karnal, and the Municipal Committee itself for recovery of Rs. 275.50 as arrears of pay from 24.5.1962 to 15.11.1962 during which period he remained under suspension under the order of respondent 1. It was alleged in the plaint that the plaintiff was the employee of the defendant Committee and was confirmed as Octroi Moharrir with effect from 12th May, 1960 and that defendant No. 1. Shri Bawa, had illegally and maliciously suspended him on 24th May, 1962 and withheld his pay for the period from 24.5.1962 to 15.11.1962, amounting to Rs. 275.50. It was also alleged that defendant No. 1 had no authority in law to inflict any punishment upon him, so the order of his suspension was null and void and the deduction of Rs. 275.50 illegal. The suit was resisted by both the defendants. It was denied that the plaintiff was suspended illegally and with a mala fide motive. It was asserted that the plaintiff, who caused evasion of municipal revenue, was suspended by defendant No. 1 after proper enquiry vide his order, dated 24th May, 1962, which he was competent to pass. The parties contested on the following issues :-

(3.) As already stated, the short question that arises in this case is whether the Executive Officer, respondent No. 1, had the authority and jurisdiction to suspend the plaintiff ? Section 39 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 , is in the following terms :-