D. S. MATHUR, SATISH CHANDRA
Ram Gopal Gupta Member Municipal Board – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
D.S. Mathur, J. - I agree with the order proposed by brother Satish Chandra, J., but with respect disagree with him in that the word "Board" used in Section 95 (a) of the U. P. Municipalities Act includes the "President", and hence the representation made by the President under Section 47-A (1) (a) of the Act for the supersession of the Board, though addressed to the State Government, has to be forwarded through the District Magistrate. The Board (Municipal Board) consists of the President and members, but what the President does, or how he acts, is not necessarily for or on behalf of the Board. As provided in Section 47-A (1) (a) of the Act, on the passing of the motion of non-confidence, the President has the option either to resign his office or to represent to the State Government to supersede the Board. Resignation from the office is the natural result of the majority decision of the Board, but the representation for supersession cannot be regarded to be the wish or desire of the Board where the President does not act under the statutory powers or the powers delegated to him by the Board, he may, at occasions, act against the wishes of the Board. Consequently, the Pres
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.