D.S.Tewatia, J. - (1.) This appeal at the instance of the Jullundur Cantonment Board, defendant, arises out of a suit at the instance of the plaintiff-respondents, who are three in number, wherein they claimed permanent injunction against the Appellant- Board restraining it from stopping them (plaintiff-respondents) from carrying on their business of selling Toori/Bhusa (straw fodder) in the premises as mentioned in the heading of the plaint.
(2.) The plaintiff-respondents, which are three Joint Hindu Firms, approached the Court with the allegation that they had been carrying on business in Toori/ Bhusa in the Cantonment area at Jullundur in the premises located in the Grain Mandi for the last 14/15 years under a licence from the defendant-Board; that their applications for the renewal of their licences for the year 1962 were rejected by the Civil Area Committee of the said Board, vide its decision Exhibit P-32 dated 22-5-1962, which was conveyed to them, vide letters, Exhibits P-40 to P-42, on 26-5-1962, whereby they were not only informed of the rejection of their applications for renewal of the licences but were also required not to carry on the aforesaid trade in the premises in question; that only the Cantonment Board, and not the Civil Area Committee was competent to take a decision in the matter, and since the decision had been taken by the Civil Area Committee, its decision in the matter was palpably without jurisdiction and ultra vires its power and that the said letters (treated by them as notices) were invalid as the same did not bear the seal of the Board.
(3.) The Board resisted the suit with the plea that by virtue of the provisions of Section 272 of the Cantonments Act, 1924, hereinafter referred to as the Act, no suit could be filed against the Board. Regarding the impugned notices and the decision of the Civil Area Committee, it was pleaded that the trade carried on by the plaintiffs was of the kind envisaged in Clause (1) of Sub-section (1) of Section 210 of the Act, the carrying on whereof required a licence; that the Cantonment Board was competent to delegate its functions under the Act to a Committee and that it had so delegated its powers and functions under Section 210 of the Act to the Civil Area Committee and so the action taken by the Civil Area Committee in rejecting the applications of the plaintiffs for the renewal of their licences in question and prohibiting them from carrying on their trade in the premises in question was clearly within their powers. In the alternative, it was pleaded that, in any case, the Board had ratified the decision of the Civil Area Committee vide its resolution Exhibit P-52 dated 31-5-1962. It was further pleaded on behalf of the Board that the residents of the locality where the plaintiffs had been carrying on their trade in Toori/ Bhusa (fodder) had complained in writing vide Exhibit D-1 dated 6-11-1961 that the carrying on of the said trade constituted a health hazard and a public nuisance and that it be immediately stopped. The complaint was marked to the Health Officer who, agreeing with the complainants, submitted his report Exhibit D.X./1 to the Board. Thereafter the Civil Area Committee passed a resolution that the carrying on of the trade in Toori/Bhusa in the Grain Market be stopped and some other place be specified for that purpose. The said resolution was confirmed by the Board, vide its resolution dated 31-5-1962.;