(1) DELAY condoned.

(2) LEAVE granted.

(3) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties finally in this appeal by their consent.

(4) THE Respondent who was the President/Chairman of Municipal Council, Tanakpur, District Champavat, U.P., was ordered to be removed from his office after serving him notice as required by Sub-section (2) of Section 48 of the U.P. State of U.P. & Anr. v. Nand Kumar Agarwal Municipalities Act, 1916 ( for short the Act). The said removal order was challenged by the Respondent before the High Court. The High Court has quashed the said removal order on two grounds (1) that the said order is not a reasoned order ; and (2) that personal hearing was not given to the respondent before passing the said order. Having obtained special leave to appeal the appellants have moved this Court for consideration of the order of the High Court.

(5) A mere look at Section 48(2-A) of the Act shows that after issuing show cause notice to the concerned alleged delinquent and after considering the explanation that may be offered by the President and making such enquiry as it may consider necessary, the State Government may, for reasons to be