Raghbir Singh Hundal vs State of Punjab

J.M. Tandon, J.

The petitioners are residents of Verka which is otherwise included within the limits of Municipal Corporation of Amritsar. In pursuance of the representation made by the residents of Verka for its exclusion from the limits of the Municipal Corporation the Advisory Board of the Corporation made a favourable recommendation.The Government agreed to accept the recommendation of the Advisory Board and Mr. Balwant Singh,the then Minister for Local Self Government wrote letter dated November 21, 1979, (P.5) to S. Raghbir Singh Hundal of Verka and it reads:

``Dear Sardar Hundal Sahib,

I have received your letter dated October 10, 1979. You are hereby informed that the necessary orders for excluding the village Verka from the limits of Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, have been issued.

I am thankful to you for your good wishes".

The Government did not issue the requisite notification under section 3 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976, (hereinafter the Act) for exclusion of Verka from its limits. The petitioners have filed the present writ praying for a direction to be issued to the Government to issue notification for excluding the area of Verka from the limits of Municipal Corporation, Amritsar.

The stand of the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, is that it is the privilege of the State Government alone to include or exclude any area under section 3(3) of the Act and in the absence of such a notification, the prayer made by the petitioners lacks the sanction of law.

It is not disputed that an area can be excluded from or included in the limit of the Corporation by the Government under Section 3(3) of the Act and under section 421 by the Corporation itself. The relevant part of sections 3 and 421 of the Act read:

"3. (1) and (2) ... ... ... ...

(3) The Government may, from time to time, after consultation with the Corporation, by notification, alter the limits specified for any City under subsection (1) or subsection (2), as the case may be, so as to include therein or exclude therefrom such area as may be specified in the notification. The Corporation shall send its views to the Government within a period of three months of the date on which it is first consulted.

(4) The power to issue a notification under subsection (3) shall be subject to the condition of previous publication. (5) ... ....

Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this act.

(a) The Corporation with the previous approval of the Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare that any portion of the rural areas shall cease to be included therein and upon the issue of such notification that portion shall be included in and form part of the urban areas;

(b) the Corporation with the previous approval of the Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette

(i) exempt the rural areas or any portion thereof from such of the provisions of this Act as it deems fit;

(ii) levy taxes, rates, fees and other charges in the rural area or any portion thereof at rates lower than those at which such taxes, rates, fees and other charges are levied in the urban areas or exempt such areas or portion from any such tax, rate, fee or other charge."

It is necessary for the State Government to consult the Corporation before issuing notification under section 3(3) of the Act and obligatory for the corporation to take approval of the Government before issuing a notification under section 421. The discretion of the Government in the matter of issuing a notification under section 3(3) is unfettered. An area can be treated to have been included in or excluded from the limits of Municipal Corporation on the issuance of a notification under section 3(3) of the Act. A decision by the Minister of the Government on the file per se has no legal value. Such decision when notified in terms of section 3(3) of the Act acquires legal force. A decision of the Minister on the file without a corresponding notification under section 3(3) of the Act even on its communication to an individual would not confer any right to the person to whom the communication is addressed or to any of the petitioners to get it enforced in the writ. The petitioners, therefore, cannot justifiably claim a direction to the Government for the issuance of a notification under section 3(3) of the Act in pursuance of the decision of the Minister communicated in letter P.5.

In the result, the writ fails and is dismissed with no orders as to costs.