- (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the Jhatka Union Amritsar through its President Gurdip Singh, but it will be treated to have been filed by Gurdip Singh only, as the union is not a registered body under any of the Statute.
(2.) The petitioner, Gurdip Singh, is a licence-holder for the purchase and sale of tail (animals) within the notified area of slaughter house, Amritsar. The Municipal Committee, respondent No. 2, but now Municipal Corporation under the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which came into force on 21st December, 1976, was charging 25 naia paisa per tail on 1955-56, 50 naia paisa in the year 1965-66 which was raised to Rs. 1/- in the year 1970-71 and then to Rs. 2/- per tail in the year 1976 with effect from 21st February, 1976. A representation on behalf of the Jhatka Union through Gurdip Singh petitioner was made to the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, that the increase of fee from Re. 1/- to Rs. 2/- per tail is very excessive and is not commensurate with the cost incurred for the maintenance of the slaughter house, and as such the same may be reduced to paisa 75 per tail. On this representation, the Municipal Corporation of Amritsar, passed a resolution on 18th May, Annexure ''P-2'' with the writ petition to the following effect :- ''Resolved that the slaughter house fee be reduced from Rs. 2.00 to Rs. 1.00 per tail with effect from 1.5.77, as the loss of income is negligible.'' Section 69 of the Act contemplates that the Corporation Secretary shall forward to the Divisional Commissioner as well as to the Government a copy of the minutes of the proceedings of each meeting of the Corporation within three days from the date of the meeting. Consequently, a copy of the said resolution was sent to the State Government, i.e. respondent No. 1. Vide Annexure ''P.1'', the State Government decided that the slaughter fee should not be reduced. It is this order Annexure P-1, which has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition.
(3.) The main ground taken by the petitioner is that the State Government had no power to annual or modify the resolution passed by the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, Annexure P-2 referred to above. In the return filed on behalf of the Punjab State, respondent No. 1, in para 2, it has been stated :- ''It is, however, submitted that the decision of the State Government incorporated in Annexure P-1 with this petition which is the impugned order is perfectly in accordance with law as the State Government has ample powers under section 423 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (hereinafter called the Corporation Act), to annual or modify any order of the Corporation, which it deems necessary and the Corporation is bound to execute the orders of the Government. Moreover, under section 69 of the Corporation Act, the Corporation Secretary is bound to forward to the State Government a copy of the minutes of the proceedings and the State Government has passed its orders under section 423 of the Corporation Act.'' In the return filed on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, certain preliminary objection have been taken as to the maintainability of the writ petition. One of the main objections is, that the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, has not been made a party in the petition. Even in the amended petition filed by the petitioner with the permission of the Court, he has not made the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, as party, and, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.;