Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (1.04 seconds)Section 430 in West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
Article 243U in Constitution of India [Constitution]
West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993
Shankar Paul & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 6 July, 2022
21. Thus, it is clear from the above that the aforesaid report also
formed the basis for taking a decision for dissolving the Board of
Councillors. The decision was thus, based on materials which were
neither disclosed, nor supplied. In absence of disclosure of the
aforesaid material, the Board of Councillors did not get appropriate
opportunity to respond and to defend. When the report of the
District Magistrate dated 14th January, 2026 was considered by the
State, it was the duty of the State to supply the copy of the report,
for the Board for Councillors to appropriately respond to the same,
especially when the decision to dissolve the Board of Councillors
was based on the above report. Admittedly, in this case, the same
had not been done. It must be borne in mind that Section 553 of
the Bengal Municipal Act of 1932, contained more or less a similar
provision as regards supersession of the Commissioner. In such
case if in the opinion of the State Government, there has been
misappropriation of the municipal fund on account of
incompetency, or persistent default in performance of the duties
imposed on them by or under the Act or for any other reason noted
therein, it could supersede the Commissioners, though such
provision unlike the provision of the said Act did not provide for an
opportunity of show-cause. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in
Sankar Das Paul (supra) had, however, struck down the decision of
13
WPA 1798 of 2026
supersession by holding that it was the mandatory duty of the State
Government to give an opportunity of hearing, since, the order
impugned had serious civil consequences and had the effect of
throwing out of office the elected Commissioners of the
Municipality, as they cannot be condemned unheard.
1