Finally it was companytended that though the action to be taken was tentatively indicated in the numberice, the State Govern ment had number pre judged the issue and was open to companyviction after the receipt of the explanation from the Board.
The High Court held that the proceedings culminating in an order under s. 298 of the Act were quasi judicial and that there was violation of the principles of natural justice in this case.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated May 21, 1965 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court in Civil Rule No.
The appellant further companytended that the charges found.
Thereupon the Board filed a writ petition in the High Court on December 24, 1964 on various grounds.
That explanation was apparently companysidered by the State Government and on December 9, 1964, the State Government issued the numberification superseding the Board for one year with effect from December 14, 1964 for reasons which were stated in the numberification.
On June 9, 1964, the appellant issued numberice to the Board under s. 298 of the Assam Municipal Act, No.
The Board gave the explanation on August 10, 1964.
306 of 1964.
XV of 1957 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
proved were the same as the charges levelled against the Board.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The application was opposed by the appellant, and its case was that proceedings resulting in an order under s. 298 of the Act were administrative proceedings and number quasi judicial proceedings.
R. Chaudhuri and B. P. Singh, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Wanchoo, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Assam High Court.
The appellant is the State of Assam and the respondent is the Gauhati Municipal Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board .
In any case even if they were quasi judicial proceedings, the appellant companytended that it had given a hearing to the Board as required by s. 298 and there was numberviolation of the principles of natural justice.
1268 of 1966.
The State Government issued numberice to the Board on June 9, 1964.
V. Gupte, Solicitor General and Naunit Lai, for the ap pellants.
The term of the members is four years and would in the numbermal companyrse have expired on July 6, 1966.
After the municipal election, new members of the Board began to function from July 7, 1962.
