( 1 ) THIS Letters Patent Appeal raises an interesting question affecting the relationship of a Municipality and its Chief Officer under the provisions of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963. The facts giving rise to the appeal are few and may be briefly stated as follows. Prior to the coming into force of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963, Palitana Municipality was governed by the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901. The petitioner was appointed Chief Officer of the Palitana Municipality in January 1959 and this appointment was approved by the Collector by an order, dated 20th February 1965. Though in the appointment the petitioner was designated as Chief Officer, there was no statutory office of Chief officer under the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901. It was only under the Gujarat municipalities Act, 1963, that a statutory office of Chief Officer was created for the first time. Palitana Municipality, therefore, on the coming into force of the gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963, passed a resolution, dated 22nd April 1965 appointing the petitioner as Chief Officer under Sec. 47 of the Act. The pay-scale of the Chief Officer was thereafter revised by Palitana Municipality with the approval of the State Government obtained under clause (a) of the proviso to Sec. 271 and a fresh resolution was passed by Palitana Municipality on 10th June 1963 confirming the petitioner as Chief Officer in the revised pay-scale with effect from 2nd January 1967. The petitioner continued to occupy the office of Chief Officer until 31st July 1969 when his service was terminated pursuant to a resolution, dated 30th July 1969 passed by the General Board of Palitana Municipality. The resolution came to be passed in following circumstances. Palitana Municipality consists of 25 councillors. Out of them, 16 Councillors sent a requisition, dated 25th July 1969 to the President requiring him to call a meeting of the General Board for the purpose of considering and passing a resolution that the service of the petitioner as Chief officer be terminated forthwith or at any rate from 31st July 1969. Pursuant to the requisition the President convened a meeting of the General Board on 30th july 1969. The meeting was accordingly held at the Municipal Office on 30th July 1969 and at the meeting a resolution was passed unanimously by all 24 members present, without any discussion whatsoever, that the service of the petitioner as Chief officer be terminated with effect from 31st July 1969. Though the petitioner was present at the meeting in his capacity as Chief Officer, he was not informed as to what were the reasons for which his service was sought to be terminated nor was any opportunity given to him to show cause against the proposed termination of his service. The resolution did not show on the face of it what was the source of the power in exercise of which the service of the petitioner was terminated but pursuant to the resolution and with a view to giving effect to it, an office order was passed by the President of the Palitana Municipality on the same day, namely, 30th July 1969 in which it was clearly recited that the resolution terminating the service of the petitioner was passed by more than two-third of the members of the General body of the Palitana Municipality under Sec. 48 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963. The office order directed that the service of the petitioner was terminated with effect from 31st July 1969 and that the petitioner would be paid three months notice pay from 1st August 1969 to 31st October 1969. The President of Palitana municipality also addressed a letter, dated 30th July 1969 to the petitioner intimating to him that his service as Chief Officer was terminated with effect from 31st July 1969 under Sec. 48 and that he would be paid three months salary in lieu of notice. The petitioner thereupon preferred the present petition challenging the validity of the resolution passed by the General Board of the