LAWS(RAJ)-1956-10-24

KESARI MAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Decided On October 29, 1956
KESARI MAL Appellant
V/S
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against an order of the government removing the petitioner from the office of Chairman of the Town municipality of Sironj.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was-duly elected as Chairman or the Town municipality of Sironj, District Kotah, and had been working as such since 26th february, 1955. He was the Secretary of the Praja Socialist Party, and for various reasons mentioned in the petition had incurred the wrath of the Tehsil and District Congress Committees, which began to press the Congress-men in authority to bring about the petitioner's removal in order to boost up the prestige of the congress in that area, and that as result of this pressure the present Government, which was run by the Congress party, ordered his removal under cover of Section 22 (10) of the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951 (Act No. 23 of 1951 ). It was alleged that he was served by the Secretary, Local Self-Government, with a charge-sheet by letter dated 10th November, 1955 of which an explanation was given by him on the 3rd December, 1955. Later at an interview he explained the case to the Deputy Minister, and had shown that none of the charges were tenable; but nevertheless an order of removal from chairmanship of the Town municipality of Sironj was passed by the Government on 24th January, 1956, and served upon him on the 6th February, 1956. It was urged that the charges were baseless, and had not been proved. It was also urged that the entire allegations, even if held to be correct did not amount to negligence in the discharge of duties, or to incapacity to act, and that the order of the Government should, therefore, be set aside. (3) The charge, Ex. P. 1, was as follows : "notice under Section 22 (10) of the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951, to the Chairman, Municipal Board, Sironj. From the complaints received against you, the audit report and other enquiry reports and your reply thereto the following stand substantiated against you :

(3.) THE explanation by the petitioner submitted to the Government was Ex. P. 2, in which he explained the various circumstances appearing against him, urging that none of the charges were true.