The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of conducting a fair and just procedure, including affording an opportunity for explanation before making an order of removal, and the requirement to furnish relevant documents for the defense during an enquiry.

1. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner was elected as a Member from Ward No. 15 of Municipal Board, Padampur in the election held in August, 1995 and was thereafter also elected as Chairperson of the Board. The impugned order was made to remove the petitioner from Chairperson as well as membership of the Board and she was declared disqualified to contest any election for five years, which reads as under:

jktLFkku ljdkj Lok;Rr 'kklu foHkkx dzekad % i0 2(p)(tkWap) Mh,ych(99)911 t;iqj] fnukad& 1&6&2000 vkns'k Jh erh foeyk nsoh] v/;{k] uxj ikfydk] ineiqj ds fo:) f'kdk;r izkIr gksus ij tkWp djok;h x;hA izkFkfed tkap es nks"kh ik;s tkus ij jktLFkku uxj ikfydk vf/kfu;e] 1959 dh /kkjk 63 ds rgr fuyfEcr dj muds fo:) U;kf;d tkWp djokbZ xbZA U;kf;d tkWp\ vf/kdkjh la;qDr fof/k ijke'khZ (f}rh;) fof/k foHkkx] 'kklu lfpoky; us viuh U;kf;d tkWp fjiksZV fnukad 23&5&2000 es Jherh foeyk nsoh] v/;{kk uxj ikfydk ineiqj ds fo:) yxk;s x;s rhuks vkjksi fl) ik;s x;s gsSA vr% jktLFkku uxj ikfydk vf/kfu;e 1959 dh /kkjk 63 o 64 ds vUrZxr iznRr 'kfDr;ks dk iz;ksx djrs gq, jkT; ljdkj ,rn~ }kjk Jherh foeyk nsoh dks uxj ikfydk ineiqj ds v/;{k in ,oa lnL;rk ls rqjUr izHkko ls fu"dkflr djrs gq, vkxkeh iWkp o"kksZ ds fy, pquko yM+us ds v;ksX; ?kksf"kr djrh gSA

vkKk ls

g@&

(lh0 ch0 'kekZ)

mi 'kklu lfpo

3. The petitioner has challenged above order through this writ petition. It was contended by Mr. S.L. Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner that the order has been made in violation of statutory provisions. It has been contended that enquiry has been conducted in respect of an allegation falling under Section 63(1)(d), obviously because the charges levelled against him does not fall within clause (a)(b) and (c) of Section 63(1) of the Act. For enquiry into such charges an enquiry can be conducted only by a judicial officer of the rank of District Judge. The enquiry into charges has been conducted by the Sub-Divisional Officer, who could not in law be entrusted with such enquiry and State Govt. could not have acted on such findings recorded by any authority who is not authorised under law to make such enquiry. In that connection it was also urged that if for any reason it is held that enquiry is not vitiated, then too the findings recorded by the SDO/Collector as an enquiry officer do not enjoy the same status as the findings recorded by a judicial officer enjoys under Section 63(2) of the Act. Such findings by enquiry officer is bound to be considered by the State Govt. on merits to reach its own conclusion. It is also urged that the order has been made in breach of principles of natural justice inasmuch as before making the order no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner to explain his conduct even if the charges levelled were found to have been proved before the Govt., the Authority empowered to make the order under Section 63 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959. It has also been contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is also not a speaking order inasmuch as it does not disclose for what charges of misconduct the order of removal and disqualifying the petitioner from contesting future elections has been made.

4. Mr. Rajesh Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1, has contended firstly that because no finding on the competence of SDO to act as enquiry officer has been recorded by the Court in earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner against order of suspension, though such grievance was raised by the petitioner, the petitioner is debarred from raising such plea in this petition on the principles of constructive res judicata. It was also urged that since enquiry envisaged under Section 63(2) is a judicial enquiry to be conducted by a judicial officer of the rank of a District Judge and the findings recorded in such enquiry is binding on the State Govt. inasmuch as the State Govt. has to make an order in conformity with those findings, the principles of natura