MOHAMMED SHAFI Vs. SANT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ISRANI, J. -Briefly stated, petitioners and non-petitioner No. 3 filed a suit in representative capacity for declaration and perpetual injunction against the non-petitioner, stating therein that non-petitioner No. l wanted to grab the land of public 'chowk', and Municipal Board, Jhunjhunu, vide order dated October by non-petitioner No. 1, the petitioners agreed to implead respondent No. 2, Municipal Board, Jhunjhunu, as party to the proceedings. Non-petitioner No. 2 raised a plea that the suit was not maintainable for want of notice under Section 271 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short, 'the Act, 1959' ). A specific issue 8-A was, therefore, framed, which reads as under: - "whether the suit was not maintainable, since no notice as required under the provisions of Section 271 of the Act, 1959 was given to the Municipal Board. " This issue was heard as preliminary issue and was decided in favour of the non petitioners and against the petitioners.

(2.) IT is submitted by Mr. M. M. Ranjan, learned counsel, that the provisions of Section 271 are not mandatory and are only directory in nature. Therefore, the trial Court has erred in holding that it was mandatory to give notice to the Municipal Board. IT is further submitted that, in fact, the Municipal Board was not a necessary party, therefore, for this reason also, it was not mandatory to give notice to the Municipal Board under Section 271 of the Act, 1959, more so, when no relief has been sought against the Municipal Board.