DISTRICT BOARD Vs. KAILASHI NATH KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendant. It arises out of Suit No. 10 of 1941 instituted by one Kailashi Nath Kapoor, since deceased, who was the Secretary and Assessing Officer of the District Board, Shahjahanpur, for a number of years.

(2.) It appears that on 29 January 1940 the District Board of Shahjahanpur, which is the defendant appellant before us, passed two special, resolutions, one of dismissal of the Secretary and the other of suspension of the Secretary forthwith until the dispossal of the appeal by the Secretary to the Provincial Government against the resolution of dimissal. It may be added here in passing that the Secretary's appeal to the Provincial Government was dismissed by his Excellency the Governor on 19 December 1940. In consequence of the resolutions passed by the District Board mentioned above, on 16 August 1940, Kailashi Nath Kapoor instituted Suit No. 10 of 1941 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Shahjahanpur claiming, various reliefs. In substance, these were to the effect that the two resolutions passed by the District Board dismissing and suspending him be declared to be illegal and Ultra, vires of the Board and that he be declared to be the Secretary of the Board He further claimed an injunction against the Board restraining it from preventing the plaintiff from discharging his duties as the Secretary and Assessing Officer of the Board. He claimed a substantial sum as arrears of salary together with interest thereon and contribution to his provident fund, up to the date of the suit as well as pendente lite. In the alternative, he claimed a substantial sum of money as compensation for his illegal dismissal and suspension.

(3.) Another suit - suit No. 3 of 941 - was filed against the District Board claiming a permanent injunction restraining the Board from carrying out and giving effect to, the two special resolutions which were the basis of suit No. 10 of 1941. This suit was filed by a member of the Board, namely Zabir Hasan Khan and a taxpayer Both the suits were heard and disposed of together by the learned Civil Judge In the result, Suit No 3 of 1941 was dismissed with costs and no appeal appears to have been filed against the decree in that suit. We are, therefore, no longer concerned with it. Suit No. 10 of 1941, however, has been partly decreed and the parties have been directed to pay and receive costs proportionate to their success and failure in the suit. The defendant Board has come up in appeal to this Court and cross-objections have been filed on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent in respect of the portion of the claim which has been dismissed by the Court below.