SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
30th September, 1958.
S.R. DAS, C.J.I., N.H. BHAGWATI, S.K. DAS, J.L. KAPUR AND K. SUBBA RAO, JJ.
Radeshyam Khare and another, Appellants
Versus
The State of M.P. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 301 of 1958.
Advocates Appeared
Mr. M. K. Nambiar, Senior Advocate (M/s. S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji and Rameshwar Nath, Advocates of M/s. Rajinder Narain and Co., with him), for Appellants; Mr. M. Adhikari, Advocate-General, Madhya Pradesh and Mr. I. N. Shroff, Advocate, for Respondents.
Judgement
S. R. DAS, CJI. : There are two appellants in this appeal. The second appellant is the Municipal Committee of Dhamtari constituted under the C. P. and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 (Act II of 1922) and the first appellant is its President having been elected as such on July 10, 1956. He assumed charge of his office as President on July 27, 1956. It may be mentioned that he was returned as a Congress candidate but has since been expelled from that party for having contested the last general election as an independent candidate against the Congress candidate.
2. It appears that there are two factions in the Municipal Committee. The first appellant alleges that one Dhurmal Daga, a member of the committee belonging to the Congress party was on August 7, 1956 detected importing within the municipal limits certain cloth without paying the octroi duty Dhurmal Daga, on the other hand, alleged that the first appellant was guilty of grave mismanagement of the affairs of the Municipal Committee and went on hunger strike for securing the appointment of a committee to enquire into the misconduct of the first appellant. Copies of the leaflets containing the demands and charges which are said to have been widely distributed are annexures I and II to the present petition. It appears that several persons and firms also preferred charges against the first appellant, the President of the Municipal Committee. The Collector Raipur personally intervened and persuaded the said Dhurmal Daga to abandon the fast on an assurance that he would look into the matter. The Collector deputed one Shri N. R. Rana the Additional Deputy Collector to enquire into the complaints of maladministration of the affairs of the Municipal Committee. By a Memorandum No. K/J N. P. Dhamtari dated August 24, 1956 the said N. R. Rana called upon the first appellant as the President of the second appellant to give detailed explanation of each complaint, a list of which was enclosed therewith. A copy of that memorandum along with its 22 enclosures is annexed to the petition and marked III. Annexures IV and V to the petition are copies of the detailed report on the objections and the reply to the charges made against the Municipal Committee submitted from the office of the Municipal Committee by the first appellant as the President of the Municipal Committee. The Additional Deputy Collector thereafter held the enquiry. The High Court states that it had "gone through the materials on which the State Government based its action on enquiry into the charges levelled against the Municipal Committee" and that the records of the enquiry showed that "on some occasions the petitioner was present during the enquiry". There is no suggestion that the appellants wanted an opportunity to adduce any evidence or were prevented from doing so or that they were in any way hampered in their defence. Presumably the Additional Deputy Collector had made a report which in due course must have been forwarded to the State Government.
3. On November 18, 1957 a notification was published in the Official Gazette whereby the State Government, in exercise of the powers conferred on it by S. 53-A of the C.P. and Berar Mnnicipalities Act, 1922 appointed one Shri B. P. Join, the second respondent before us, as the Executive Officer of the Municipal Committee, Dhamtari for a period of 18 months with certain powers as therein mentioned. A copy of that notification has been annexed to the petition and marked VIII but as the major part of the arguments canvassed before us turns on the contents of that notification the same is reproduced below in extenso :-
"Dated, Bhopal, the 18th November, 1957 No. 9262/11538-U-XVIII - Whereas it appears to the State Government that the Municipal Committee, Dhamtari, has proved itself incompetent to perform the duties imposed on it by or under the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 (II of 1922), inasmuch as it-
(a) granted grain and building advances to the em
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.