( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The precise relief which the applicant seeks is that this Court may be pleased to direct the opposite parties that the order of suspension passed by the Chairman of the District Board shall not be operative. It is further prayed that the opposite parties be prohibited by a writ of prohibition or any other suitable writ or direction from proceeding further with the enquiry initiated against the applicant. A further prayer embodied in the application is that an interim order may be passed restraining the opposite parties from enforcing the suspension order dated 8-9-1950, until the decision of this case.

( 2 ) IN order to understand the points which have arisen in this case a few facts are necessary. The applicant is the Secretary of the District Board of Mirzapur. His allegation is that in May 1951 he incurred the displeasure of a member of the Board, Shri Narsing Prasad Singh, and that thereafter that member made a complaint against him to the Chairman. Subsequently, the matter came up for consideration before the Executive Committee of the District Board on 15-5-1951. On that date the complaint of Shri Narsingh Prasad Singh against the Secretary was considered by the Executive Committee of the Board which appointed a Sub-Committee to go into the charges against the applicant. It was directed to submit its report to the Executive Committee.

( 3 ) THE case, as presented by the applicant, is that on 25-5-1951 the sub-committee met and, after detailing the various charges which had been levelled against him, recommended that the deponent be suspended in order to facilitate further proceedings against the deponent. The deponent was required to submit his explanation and he appears to have complied with this direction. The matter referred to above came up on 7th and 8th September before the Executive committee. On those dates i. e. 8th the chairman of the District Board made an order in which he stated that the Executive Committee of the Board had in a previous resolution directed him to suspend the Secretary as his explanation was not satisfactory that there were serious charges against him and that it was necessary to hold further enquiries into them. In these circumstances, the Chairman added that he had decided to suspend him pending enquiry and that that enquiry would be conducted by a Committee consisting of three members of the Board who were named by him in his order. This order of the Chairman was conveyed to the deponent on 10-9-1951. Thereafter, on 11th the deponent made representations to the Chairman contending that his dismissal was illegal and improper. This representation was considered and rejected by the executive Committee at its meeting held on the 13th of September and the deponents case is that he was asked to hand over charge of his office to one Shri Mahendra Nath but he adds that inspite of the order he has not actually done so.

( 4 ) THE contention put forward on behalf of the applicant is that his suspension is illegal and that the sub-committee appointed by the Chairman had no authority in law to investigate the charges against the deponent. It is further alleged that the deponent has no other adequate or efficatious remedy in law against his proposed suspension by the opposite parties and that, for that reason, he is entitled to a writ or order or direction by this Court.

( 5 ) THE office of the Secretary is a statutory one under the District Boards Act. Section 70 of Act x [10] of 1922 (hereinafter called the Act) lays down the manner in which the Secretary shall be appointed. That section runs as follows :

"every board shall by special resolution appoint a secretary who shall be a whole time salaried officer. The appointment of the secretary and the conditions of his service shall be made in conformity with the rules framed by the Provincial Government. " under the scheme of the Act the Secretary has certain special functions