Case Details

Citation(s)
1970 SLG 3263 1970 SLD 3263 = 1970 PLD 804
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 218 of 1962, decided on 17th September 1969.
Presented By: A. R. Sheikh and Muhammad Fazle Ghani Khan, JJ
A. H Najafi for Petitioner. Mian Aslam Riaz Hussain, Addl. A: G. for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD AYUB KHAN CHUGHTAI --Petitioner

VERSUS

MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, MIANWALI AND ANOTHER ---Respondents

Law:

Section:

(a) Punjab Municipal Act (III of 1911), S., 50---Words "every person" in S. 50-Cannot be construed to include members of public at large or employees of Municipal Committee-Surcharge under section can be imposed upon Municipal Commissioners alone and not against employees of Committee or members of public at large-Surcharge cannot be levied unless loss, waste or misapplication of Municipal fund or property reported by audit authorities: The, words "every person" used in the first part of sub clause (1) of section 50 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 cannot be construed to include all members of public at large or for that- matter the employees of the Municipal Committee and have strictly to be interpreted with reference 'to the title of the section "Liability of Members of the Committee" and the general import of the language of the section. Reading the section as a whole it is apparent that the levy of surcharge under this provision of law can only be imposed upon the Municipal Commissioners alone and the employees of the Committee or the members of t-he public at large cannot be imposed any levy of surcharge for their alleged act of negligence towards the Committee. Clause (1) of section 50 requires that the loss, waste or misapplication of the Municipal funds should have been reported by the Examiner of Local Fund Accounts or other audit authorities empowered by the Local Government in this behalf to declare the loss to be a direct consequence of the act of a member. No such report of any competent officer was forthcoming in this case. Therefore, the order levying the surcharge without the audit report as required by subsection (1) of section 50 was without lawful autho rity. (b) Punjab Municipal Act (III of 1911), S. 50-Loss caused to Municipal fund or property-Employer paying employee pay and 8Zlowancek due for services rendered-No loss, held, caused to employer either in law or in fact. A person was appointed by the Municipal Committee in an existing vacancy on a prescribed scale and during the tenure of his office he performed his duties and received his salary accord ingly. There was no complaint of inefficiency or…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register