SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1966 Supreme(All) 199

S.N.DWIVEDI
B. N. Sarin – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
K.C. Saxena and S.C. Khare, for Petitioner; T.P. Asthana, S.N. Kakkar, R.N. Bhalla and Sridhar, for Respondents.

Judgement

ORDER :- The Municipal Board of Farrukhabad - Fatehgarh consists of 25 members. The petitioner, Dr. B. N. Sarin, was its President and accordingly, an ex officio member of it. On September 9, 1966, a resolution of no-confidence was passed against him. He says that the resolution is illegal and ineffective inasmuch as the meeting of the Municipal Board in which it was passed was convened illegally.

2. His contention is founded on the circumstance that no notice of the meeting was ever sent to him. The meeting convened without notice even to a single member is illegal. He has sought to support his contention by authorities : W. Smyth v. H. F. Darley, (1849) 9 ER 1293. Dobson v. Fussy, (1831) 131 E.R. 117 Young v. Ladies Imperial Club, 1920-2 KB 523, Radha Kishan Jaikishan v. Municipal Committee Khandwa, AIR 1934 P.C. 62, Hari Dutt Bahuguna v. State of U. P., Civil Misc. Writ No. 2427 of 1959 D/- 19-11-1959 by Tandon J. (All.) and K. N. Misra v. Chancellor. University of Allahabad, Civil Misc. Writ No. 1501 of 1965 D/- 3-12-1967 : (AIR 1967 All. 107).

3. Respondents admit that no notice of the meeting was sent to him. But their contention is that he had full knowledge of the d

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top