B.P. Banerjee, J. - (1.) In this writ petition a very interesting question of law of great public importance, namely what is the course of action to be taken when it was found on enquiry that there had been misuse and/or misappropriation of Municipal funds by the Municipal Commissioners, had arisen. In the writ petition petitioner prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the District Magistrate to proceed according to law against the person concerned on the basis of the finding arrived at the report of the complaints with regard to misuse and misappropriation of the fund of the Kandi Municipality and to initiate criminal action against the persons concerned in accordance with law.
(2.) The petitioners are the rate-payers of Kandi Municipality. The petitioner No. 2 is a Commissioner of the said Municipality. The case of the petitioners are that money was being spent for the purpose of opening the feeding centres in different wards of the said Municipality. The funds are allotted as against respective ward, to the Commissioners of the said ward to make expenses towards the purchase of food stuff and distribution and thereafter giving the same into respective gruels. It was also alleged that said feeding centres were not open into two wards. It was also alleged that the money which had been shown to have been spent had not been spent and there has been gross abuse and misuse of the municipal fund. It was further alleged that one Nabadwip Chandra Sinha a near relation of Shri Radha Mohan Sinha, the present Chairman of the said Municipality, the respondent No. 5 had been favoured with the allotment of the entire work of pipeline and the repairs thereof for the said Municipality. It was further alleged that the Chairman had not only acted illegally and arbitrarily in the matter, but the same had disqualified the said Chairman to hold the office under Section 62 of the Bengal Municipal Act. It was also alleged that the books of accounts and records of the Municipality were not kept open for inspection to all the Municipal Commissioners as required under the law and that some of the Municipal Commissioners had made representation before the District Magistrate, Murshidabad ventilating their grievances stating in details how public money was being misused and/or misappropriated. It further appears that the District Magistrate, Murshidabad on receipt of the said representation was prima fade satisfied that the irregularities were caused by the Commissioners and/or the Chairman of the said Municipality and by a Memo dated 22nd January, 1984 directed the Sub Divisional Officer, Kandi to make investigation into the allegations made in the said representation filed by some Commissioners of the said municipality. It further appears that the Sub Divisional Officer, Kandi in his turn without making any personal enquiry directed the Block Development Officer to make enquiry into the grievances so made in the said representation. It further appears that a complaint was also lodged with respondent No. 3, namely the District Magistrate, Murshidabad disclosing various irregularities, malpractices and misappropriation of municipal fund by some of the Commissioners of Kandi Municipality and that the District Magistrate directed the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad to nuke an enquiry and submit a report. It also appears that the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad by the Memo No. 288/D. E. F. dated 14.2.1984 directed the Enforcement Department to make enquiry into the allegation and to submit a report. It also appears that the enquiry was duly held by the Inspector attached to the Enforcement Branch in that matter and the finding of the said enquiry along with materials thereof were submitted before tho Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad. Thereafter the said report was forwarded by the Superintendant of Police to the District Magistrate. It was also stated that the District Magistrate by his Memo being 2040/LSC/dated 5.11.1984 directed the Chairman of the Kandi Municipality for Edging a complaint before the local police station against the respondent No. 7 to 11 who are the Municipal Commissioners of the said Municipality on the basis of the enquiry report. It was further stated that the Chairman of the said Municipality neither lodged any F.I.R. nor had taken any steps relating to investigation into the allegation of malpractice and misappropriation made by some of the Municipal Commissioners. The substance of the finding of the enquiry report was set out in paragraph 11 of the writ petition. It is not necessary to set out the finding of the said enquiry in this proceeding.
(3.) Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, contended that when admittedly on the basis of investigation it was established that there was a prima facie case for initiating criminal case against the persons responsible tor misappropriation of municipal fund, the authorities were remaining silent and were not taking any steps nor filed the First Information Report with the police for binging the offenders to to justice. Mr. Mukherjee also submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners had no other alternative but to move this Court for appropriate order and direction so that the Municipal Commissioners who had misappropriated the municipal funds violating their legal duties in an unauthorised modes which had increased the burden of tax-payers or otherwise injuriously affects the tax payers and their property. This Court should pass appropriate order so that the wrong doers and/or the persons responsible for such misappropriation should be proceeded with in accordance with law and punished if they are ultimately found guilty of the offence.;