Judgement

VAIDIALINGAM, J.:- This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the judgment and order dated April 10, 1969 of the Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 70 of 1964, dismissing Civil Writ Petition No. 22 of 1963 filed by the appellant to quash the order of the respondent dated September 11, 1962.

2. The circumstances that led to the filing of the Civil Writ Petition No 22 of 1963 may be briefly stated : In the elections held in October, 1959, the appellant was elected as a Member of the Municipal Committee, Phagwara. On June 20, 1960, a meeting was held for the election of the President and Vice President of the Committee. The meeting was presided over by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil). According to the appellant the Presiding Officer conducted the elections of the President and the Vice President in an irregular and illegal manner and was favouring the party led by another committee member Bhag Ram. When the appellant and another member Om Prakash Agnihotri, protested against this conduct of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), the group led by Bhag Ram brought into the Town Hall some unruly elements from outside who created panic and confusion and manhandled Om Prakash Agnihotri, who was also a candidate for the presidential office.

3. It may be stated at this stage that according to the respondent, Om Prakash Agnihotri created a scene in the meeting and the appellant who was a staunch supporter of Om Prakash Agnihotri brought into the Town Hall, a number of outsiders with a view to cause chaos and confusion in the meeting and that the appellant did not maintain decorum and did not care to obey the directions of the Chairman. Ultimately, Bhag Ram was elected as a President.

4. The appellant and certain other members of the committee filed Writ Petition No. 1095 of 1960 in the High Court challenging the election of Bhag Ram as the President. But the said Writ Petition was dismissed on the ground that the disputed facts involved therein could not be gone into by the High Court in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.

5. While the Writ Petition No. 1095 of 1960 was pending in the High Court, the respondent State on December 5, 1960 served a notice on the appellant under the proviso to Section 16 (1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (Punjab Act III of 1911) hereinafter to be referred as the Act) calling upon him to show cause within 21 days why he should not be removed from the membership of the Committee under Section 16 (1) (e) of the Act. The said notice charged the appellant of having brought outsiders into the Town Hall on June 20, 1960 to cause disturbance to the meeting that was being then held and that he did not maintain decorum nor did he care to obey the rulings of the Chairman. In consequence the appellant was charged of having flagrantly abused his position as a member of the Committee.

6. The appellant sent to reply on December 12, 1960 controverting the allegations made in the notice. In turn he averred that the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) who presided over the meeting was actively helping the party led by Bhagat Ram and it was the latter who brought in outsiders to create confusion and disorder. He denied having brought any outsiders into the hall as alleged in the notice. He further stated that the crowd that was brought into the hall by Bhagat Ram manhandled Om Prakash Agnihotri. He further denied the allegation that he did not maintain decorum and that he did not obey the Chair. On the other hand, he stated that he was quite obedient to the Chair and that he was not responsible for the confusion that prevailed at the meeting. Finally he stated that even if the allegations made in the show cause notice were true, they will not bring the matter under Section 16 (1) (e) of the Act justifying the action being taken against him by way of removing him from the Committee.

7. On September 11, 1962 the Governor of Punjab passed an order under Section 16