A Municipality cannot pass a resolution or issue a notice to close down a slaughter house or to not issue licenses for the sale of beef or flesh of buffaloes within its area, unless the grounds for such action are specified in the relevant statute.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to cancel or withdraw the notice dated 27-2-1950 served on the petitioners and also for an order for cancellation of the resolution dated 24-2-1950 passed by the respondents and for direction calling upon the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the said resolution and/or the said notice.

( 2 ) THE petitioners are the owners of two beef shops in Ward No. 4 Charial, Budge Budge, to the District of 24-Parganas. The petitioner 3 is the nephew of the petitioners 1 and 2 and one of the said beef shops is stated to have come into existence 100 years ago. The area in which the shops are situated is an industrial area and it is stated that it is inhabited predominantly by Mahomedans. It is alleged that beef is one of the staple food of Mahomedans particularly the poorer section of that community and due to the persistent demands of the local people two other shops besides the two shops belonging to the petitioners came into existence about thirty years ago and have been in the locality ever since. The petitioners have been at all material times' holders of licences from the respondent Municipality granted under Section 370 (1) of the Act for carrying on the said business of sale of beef and meat in the locality and at no point of time they contravened any of the terms or conditions of the licence in any way as to be a cause of annoyance or offence or danger to persons residing in or frequenting the immediate neighbourhood. In the middle of February 1950 one Pandit Ram Chandra Awasthi, an orthodox Up-country Brahmin was appointed Chairman of the said Municipality. At a meeting of the Commissioners of the Municipality held on 24-2-1950 a resolution was purported to be passed in the following terms:"in view of the fact that due to indiscriminate slaughter depletion of cattle wealth -- the backbone of this country has become the order of the day and inasmuch as acute shortage of draught' animals and paucity in milk supply has brought in their wake, woes and miseries in abundance and because providing an adequate diet full of milk is one of the main factors in building up of a strong nation of healthy and happy inhabitants, resolved that with a view to increasing the yield of milk and cattle wealth and their progeny for the general economic uplift of the masses specially the agricultural produces of the country, the Municipal Slaughter House for slaughtering cow, bull, bullock, or buffaloes, be closed down with effect from 1-3-1950 and further resolved that no licence under Sections 408 and 418 be issued for slaughtering or for sale of beef or flesh of such animals within the municipal area, excepting on bona fide religious festivals and on ceremonial occasions. ""it is also resolved that the services of the watchman of Municipal Slaughter House be dispensed with from 1-3-1950 on payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice".

( 3 ) ON 27-2-1950 the petitioners were served with a notice under the signature of Mr. Awasthi, the Chairman of the Municipality to the following effect:"to shaikh Mongru Mia and others, beef Stall Holder, Trunk Road, Charial, dated, Budge Budge, 27-2-1950. Dear Sir, with a view to increase the supply of milk and cattle wealth and their progeny, the Commissioners of the Budge Budge Municipality in their special meeting held on 24-2-1950 have decided to close down the Municipal slaughter House and no licence for slaughtering or for sale of beef or flesh of buffaloes etc. will be issued henceforth. This will come into effect from 1-3-1950 which please note. Yours faithfully, Sd. Illegible Chairman, Budge Budge Municipality. "

( 4 ) IT is stated that the said resolution and the notice are ultra vires, illegal and mala fide, and constitute violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (g), Constitution of India. It appears that af