Regulations regarding the dismissal and removal of municipal executive officers were found ultra vires, as they exceeded the authority defined in the Municipalities Act, particularly around dismissal procedures.

1. I agree with my brother Dwivedi that the regulations published in Notification No. 6471 / XI - 226-46, dated the 29th November, 1946, and printed at p. 654 of the Municipal Manual. Uttar Pradesh, Vol. 1, 1952; are, in their application to an executive officer of a municipal board, ultra vires the State Government. Since we are overruling a decision of our brother Tandon, I consider it necessary to add a few words of my own.

2. The Municipalities Act contains different provisions regarding appointment, punishment, dismissal etc. of different classes of officers and servants, and it is by no means certain that the impugned regulations are meant to govern the dismissal, removal or reduction of an executive officer. The prevision "every order of dismissal, removal or reduction shall be in writing" means that the regulations govern the dismissal, removal or reduction by an "order" and not by a "resolution" the board.
An executive officer is liable to be punished, dismissed or removed by a special resolution of the board, (vide S.58), as well as by an ordinary resolution of the board on a recommendation, made by the President after an enquiry under S.69 - A - In either case it is the resolution and not order of the board by which the executive officer is punished, dismissed or removed. "Resolution" is distinct from "order" and ''order" does not comprise a resolution. Regulation No. 21 refers to "order" and not "resolution".
Further, the express requirement that the order must been writing suggests that the regulation is not meant to apply to a resolution because a resolution is always reduced to writing. An executive officer, or any other officer, can be dismissed, removed or reduced also by art order, provided that the order is of the State Government passed on a record of enquiry completed against him by the President and submitted with his recommendation to the State Government. It may be that the regulations, though expressed in wide language, are intended to apply when the State Government passes an order against an executive officer or other officer or servant.

3. The Act contains provisions dealing with the heads "service" "conditions of service" and "period of service." S.57(3) deals with conditions of service of executive officers and medical officers of health. S.59(3) deals with conditions of service of officiating executive officers. S.66(2) and S.68(2) deal with conditions attached to the appointment of secretaries and other officers.
S.297(1)(f), (h), (i), (j), (k) and (l) deals with regulations to be made by a board in respect of (a) monthly salaries of certain servants, (b) allowances of the servants employed by a board, (c) security to be furnished by a servant of a hoard, (d) leave to servants of a board, (e) the period of service of servants of a board and the conditions under which they are entitled to receive - gratuities or compassionate allowance on retirement, or on their becoming disabled through the execution of their duty and (f) contributions to a pension or provident fund established by a hoard. It is obvious from these provisions that the heads "service", "conditions of service" and "period of service" are different from one another. Even if the head "service" or "conditions of service'' might be said to comprise everything from the commencement to the termination of service, the head "period of service" cannot be said to comprise everything. How a service can be terminated may be a part of the conditions of service, but service can be terminated in various ways, such as by expiry of the period of service, by resignation, by death, by dismissal or by removal.
Consequently "period of service' is only one of several matters comprised in 'conditions of servic