- (1.) THIS is an appeal from a judgment and order of d. Basu, J. , dated the 16th May, 1967.
(2.) THE relevant facts are that at the material time the petitioner was officiating as the Harbour Master under the commissioner for the Port of Calcutta. On the 6th January, 1965, Secretary to the Commissioner gave notice of a special meeting to be held on the 11th january, 1965, at 3. 30 p. m. It was stated in this notice that the agenda for the meeting would be sent in due course. The meeting was held on the 11th january, 1965. At this meeting 16 out of 24 Commissioners were present. The chairman produced a stencil slip containing item No. 50 of the agenda. This is a new item introduced at the meeting itself. It concerned the continuance of the appellant as Harbour Master. The item was considered by the meeting and it was decided that the appellant should go back to the post of the Deputy harbour Master. In the application under Article 226 of the Constitution the resolution dated the 11th January, 1965, by which the appellant was reverted to the post of Deputy Harbour Master has been challenged.
(3.) VARIOUS contentions were raised before us by Counsel for both the parties; but the real point seems to be whether a resolution of this nature could be passed without a proper agenda. In this connection we have to take note of the relevant provisions of two sections of the Calcutta Port Act, 1890. Section 32 (1) is as follows : - "the power of appointing, promoting, granting leave, suspending, finding, reducing or dismissing, or of disposing of any other question relating to the services of the employees of the commissioners including the power of disposing with the services of any such employee otherwise than by reason of the misconduct of such employee shall be exercised, in the case of employees whose maximum monthly salary exclusive of allowances is less than the thousand rupees, by the Chairman or the deputy Chairman, and in every other case, by the Commissioners in meeting. ";