The court clarified that disqualification from a municipal committee requires a direct contract interest, not just property ownership or rent receipt.

1. The petitioner Bhagwandas has filed this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution for quashing the order of the respondent No. 2 dated 18th August 1964 rejecting the application of the petitioner against a notice issued by the respondent No. 1.

2. The facts are somewhat unusual and require to be stated in detail. The petitioner is a resident within the municipal limits of the City of Achalpur and was elected as a member of the Achalpur City Municipal Committee in 1962 from Ward No. 19, Jiwanpura ward of the City of Achalpur. The respondent No. 1 is the President of that Municipal Committee. The petitioner alleged that there were 35 members comprising the Municipal Committee of Achalpur and were divided into two groups. 17 belonging to the party of the President and 18 members in opposition to him. The petitioner has further alleged that he left the party of the President along with some other members and joined the opposition group because of the mal - administration in the Municipal Committee and thus the party in opposition to the President was in a majority. A resolution of no - confidence was moved against the respondent No. 1 at a meeting of the Committee held on 25-7-1964. Thereafter, on 30th July 1964, that is, five days after the moving of the resolution of no - confidence, the respondent No. 1 issued a notice to the petitioner. This notice is filed by the petitioner and annexed to the petition as Annexure A. By this notice the respondent No. 1 intimated to the petitioner that he had incurred a disqualification as a member under S.15 (1) of the C. P. and Berar Municipalities Act and under S.22 (2) of the said Act the petitioner had forthwith ceased to be a member of the Municipal Committee and his office had become vacant. In this notice it is alleged by the respondent No. 1 that it had come to the notice of the respondent No. 1 that the petitioner had given his house in Jiwanpura to the Municipal Committee, Achalpur, on rent of Rs. 20 per month for holding Jiwanpura Marathi Primary School with effect from 11th December 1961. It was further alleged that the petitioner had been actually receiving from the Municipal x Committee rent at the above rate since 1-12-1961 upto June 1964, that the above transaction and contract amounts to direct interest of the petitioner in a contract with the Municipal Committee and as a result of this, he had incurred the disqualification under S.15 (1) of the said Act.

3. On receipt of this notice, the petitioner promptly sent a reply to the President, which is Annexure B. In this reply, the petitioner denied that he had given any of his house in Jiwanpura to the Municipal Committee on rent as alleged in the President's notice. He specifically stated that the house in question did not belong to him, nor has he been receiving the rent therefor as alleged in the President's notice. The reply further disclosed that the house in question belonged to one Shankar Chandrabhuj Hedge to whom it was sold under a registered sale - deed on 19th of September 1959 and that Hedge had already brought this fact to the notice of the Secretary of the Municipal Committee, orally and in writing. The reply disclosed one more fact that the petitioner was not a member of the Municipal Committee when the house was taken on rent by the Municipal Committee in 1961 and the petitioner had never entered into a contract with the Municipal Committee since then. He also alleged that the Municipal Committee had wrongly continued his name in the records, though in the nazul records the name of the owner is correctly shown as that of Shankar Hadge. The reply a