ORDER K. K. Dube, J l. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the powers of the Collector to enquire into the question as to whether the resignation tendered by respondents 2 and 3 are genuine or not and for a writ or Certiorori to quash the order passed on 22-12-1978 by which the respondents 2 and 3 were to continue as councilors pending enquiry into the matter of their resignations. 2. In the election of councilors held in the month of June 1978, Parmanand Vishwadeva and Rakesh Dube respondents 2 and 3 were duly elected as councilors. It is alleged by the petitioner that on 20-12-1978, Parmanand and Rakesh Dube, respondents 2 and 3, tendered their resignations to the President. The President, on receipt of the resignations, is said to have accepted them and intimated the Collector, Datia and the Director, Local-Self Government, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal for further action contemplated under section 40 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In the meantime, the respondents 2 and 3 intimated the Collector that they had not resigned nor had they tendered any resignation to the President from the councillorship of the Municipal Council. Datia and that the President Municipal, Council Datia is only utilising forged documents with the ulterior motive of reducing the number of opposition members. These memoranda were supported by affidavits of respondents 2 and 3. The Collector, Datia, who is a prescribed authority under section 40 of the M.P. Municipalities Act, passed the impugned order dated 22-12-1978 indicating his intention to enquire into the genuineness of the resignations by respondents 2 and 3 and directed that pending such enquiry, the respondents 2 and 3 will continue to function as councilors as though they had not resigned. The Municipal Council, Datia through its President, Rajendra Prasad Rawat now seeks to challenge the order of the Collector. 3. Two questions arise for consideration in this case. The Municipal Council, Datia through its President, Rajendra Prasad Rawat now seeks to challenge the order of the Collector. 3. Two questions arise for consideration in this case. First, whether the Collector has power to make enquiry into the question of genuineness of the resignation tendered by a councilor under section 40 of the Act, and secondly, whether he can pass an interim order directing that the impugned resignations will not be effective pending an enquiry into the matter and that the councilors who arc said to have resigned shall continue to function as such during the period of enquiry. 4. Section 40 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act reads as under:- "40. Resignation by Councillor – (1) Any Councillor may resign his office by tendering his resignation in writing, to the President, and his seat shall there-upon become vacant. (2) On receipt of the resignation under sub-section (1) the President shall communicate the same to the prescribed authority who shall cause the fact of such resignation and the occurrence of casual vacancy thereby to be notified in the Gazette. (3) If it appears to the State Government that any Councillor having become liable for removal under section 41 has tendered his resignation to escape such removal, then notwithstanding any thing contained in this section, the State Government may order his removal in accordance with the provisions of the said section and thereupon the Councillor shall be deemed to have been removed from the date he resigned his office. Under sub-section (1), any councillor may resign his office by tendering his resignation in writing to the President. What is required is that the resignation in writing should be tendered to the President. Once this is done, the consequence follows that is, the seat of such councillor becomes vacant. It is not necessary in such cases, that the President should accept the resignation. The consequence automatically follows. This, however postulates that the resignation is genuine and not a fake one. Indeed, no consequences as envisaged in sub section (1) shall follow if the resignation is a fake one. 5. The question that the resignation is genuine or fake is an important one and the consequent vacancy of seat depends upon the genuineness of the resignation. The Act, however, is silent as to who can enquire into the genuineness of the resignation. 5. The question that the resignation is genuine or fake is an important one and the consequent vacancy of seat depends upon the genuineness of the resignation. The Act, however, is silent as to who can enquire into the genuineness of the resignation. In the present case, the respondents 2 and 3 have given their affidavits alleging that fake resignations are being used by the President and that they have not resigned, while the President of the Council asserts that the resignations are given by the respondents 2 and 3 and their seats have become vacant. There is no machinery expressly provided to resolve such disputes nor a power indicated in the Act which could be exercised to deal with the situations, arising during the pendency of enquiry into such disputes. 6. Now, under sub-section (2) the President is enjoined to communicate the resignations to the prescribed authority who shall cause the fact of such resignation and the occurrence of casual vacancy thereby to be notified in the Gazette. The duty enjoined on the prescribed authority who is the Collector in this case, is imperative and he is bound to notify in the Gazette the fact of resignation and the occurrence of casual vacancy thereby. The Collector here is not expected to merely act as post office and to take the word of the President as final and proceed to publish the resignation of the members. This does not seem to be the intention of sub section (2). It would be observed that the publication neither of the resignation nor of the vacancy consequent on such resignation has any bearing on anything contained in the Act. It would appear that the absence of a provision like sub-section (2) of section 40 of the Act would not be missed in the Act for any ostensible purpose. Why has this sub-section been thus introduced in the scheme of section 40. There is a presumption against the redundancy. We think that sub-section (2) has been advisedly kept and fulfills a purpose which we would soon point out. The vacancy would undoubtedly follow a valid and genuine resignation and therefore, if it appears to the Collector that there is a controversy as regards the genuineness of the resignation, he is bound to satisfy himself before he takes the further step of notifying it in the Gazette. 7. The vacancy would undoubtedly follow a valid and genuine resignation and therefore, if it appears to the Collector that there is a controversy as regards the genuineness of the resignation, he is bound to satisfy himself before he takes the further step of notifying it in the Gazette. 7. For the due compliance of sub-section (2), the prescribed authority was necessarily required to go into the fact of the genuineness of the resignation of the Councilors. Such a power is necessarily implied. Where an Act confers a jurisdiction it impliedly also grants the power of doing all such acts or employing such means as are essentially necessary to its execution. Cui Jurisdictio Data Est, Da Vuoque Concessa Esse Videntur, Sine Quibus Jurisdictio Explicari Non Potuit. (See. Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes, Eleventh Edition, P. 350). The duty resting on the prescribed authority cannot be discharged unless he is granted the power to enquire into the question of genuineness of the resignation. The Collector who is the prescribed authority has thus the power to make an enquiry into the genuineness of the resignations before he proceeds to notify the same in the Gazette. 8. The question then arises whether the prescribed authority can make an order to meet the situation in the interim period, directing that the Councilors shall continue to remain as members during the period the genuineness of the resignation was enquired into. It may well be that on the basis of a forged resignation an elected councillor is deprived of his right to participate in the meetings. It is equally possible that after tendering his resignation the Councilor may try to wriggle out of it and make a false claim that he has not resigned. Yet, if the prescribed authority makes any order even for the interim period, he would be interposing into the operation of sub section (1) and unless the power to arrest the operation of sub-section (1) was necessary for the exercise of the power given to him under sub-section (2), such a power could not be said to be vesting in him by implication. Though the two subsections are part of the same scheme, but for the exercise of power under sub-section (2), it does not appear necessary that any order need be passed suspending the animation of sub-section (1). Though the two subsections are part of the same scheme, but for the exercise of power under sub-section (2), it does not appear necessary that any order need be passed suspending the animation of sub-section (1). Unless the prescribed authority was expressly granted the power, he could not order one way or the other asking a councillor either to continue or to desist from continuing his membership when the impugned resignation had been tendered to the President. The Collector was therefore not justified in directing that the two respondents shall continue to function as Councilors pending enquiry by him. Such a power was not necessary to be exercised by him for the due discharge of duties enjoined on him under sub• section (2). 9. The petition is allowed. The directions by the Collector that the respondents 2 and 3 shall continue to function are hereby quashed, The Collector, however, shall proceed to enquire into the genuineness of the resignations under section 40 of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. The outstanding amount of security be refunded to the petitioner.