Case Note & Summary
The case involved a writ petition filed by the petitioner against the State of Punjab, challenging his removal from the office of Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Committee, Bhatinda. The removal was based on the ground that the petitioner, being an employee of the Punjab State Electricity Board, was holding an office of profit under the State of Punjab, thus disqualifying him from contesting municipal elections. The order for removal was issued on 5.8.1994 under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The court noted that the term of the office of Municipal Commissioner was five years, which had expired in 1997, and more than 15 years had passed since then. Consequently, the court found that the petition had become infructuous as there was no surviving grievance. The writ petition was dismissed, but the court allowed the petitioner the liberty to file an appropriate application if he was aggrieved by the order. The decision was rendered on 30.4.2012.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Infructuous Petition - Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India - The petition was dismissed as the term of the office of Municipal Commissioner had expired, rendering the grievance non-existent. The court clarified that the petitioner could file an appropriate application if aggrieved by the order (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition challenging the removal of the petitioner from the office of Municipal Commissioner is maintainable given the expiration of the term.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous due to the expiration of the term of office of Municipal Commissioner, with the court allowing the petitioner to file an appropriate application if aggrieved by the order.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction
- Quashing of notification
- Office of profit
- Municipal elections
- Infructuous petitions
