JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) THIS is a petition filed by the petitioners challenging an order passed by the State Government dated 16th December 1980 directing the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, to stop the family welfare scheme run by the employees of the Corporation in co-operation with the corporation itself. ( 2. ) ACCORDING to the petitioners, the Corporation by a resolution has adopted family benefit fund scheme from 1974 which is run by the Corporation although this scheme was based on a scheme made by the State government. Under this scheme the employees of the Corporation voluntarily contribute and on their retirement they get whatever is accumulated with interest and in case of mishap they are paid certain amount of compensation. It appears that the State Government by the impugned order stopped the functioning of the scheme on some misapprehension that it has to get the advice of the Central Government and thereafter the matter was considered by the Controller of Insurance and the Controller of insurance in turn passed the order dated 23rd March 1981 (Annexure R-III ). The petitioners by this petition have challenged these orders. ( 3. ) IT is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the state Government had no jurisdiction to pass the order as it has passed as the only jurisdiction conferred on the State Government in matters of municipal corporations is under section 421 of the M. P. Municipal corporation Act, 1956 and it is contended that section 421 will not apply in terms to stop this kind of scheme which is a voluntary scheme run by the employees of the Corporation. It is, therefore, contended that the order passed by the State Government is without jurisdiction. As regards the order of the Controller of Insurance it is contended that the question of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 does not arise, as the scheme will not be one which falls within the ambit of section 30 and, therefore, the order passed by the Controller also is without jurisdiction. ( 4. ) ADMITTEDLY the scheme is not any kind of business as no benefits derived from the scheme go to any one except the contributors. ( 4. ) ADMITTEDLY the scheme is not any kind of business as no benefits derived from the scheme go to any one except the contributors. It is also not disputed that the employees of the Corporation make a voluntary contribution although the amount of contribution is deducted because they give declaration to the Corporation for getting the deductions done from their salaries. On their retirement they get whatever is accumulated with interest and on mishap certain amount is paid to the members of the family as provided in the scheme. It is, therefore, clear that neither it is paid as insurance of the business nor anything which could attract the provisions of section 30 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act. Section 30 reads; - "30. Corporation to have the exclusive privilege of carrying on life insurance business.- Except to the extent otherwise expressly provided in this Act, on and from the appointed day, the Corporation shall have the exclusive privilege of carrying on life insurance business in india; and on and from the said day any certificate of registration under the Insurance Act held by any insurer immediately before the said day shall cease to have effect in so far as it authorises him to carry on life insurance business in India. " This section provides that the Corporation will have the exclusive privilege of carrying on life insurance business. The term "life insurance business" has been defined in section 2 (ii) of the Insurance Act, 1938 and it provides : "life insurance business means the business of effecting contracts of insurance upon human life, including any contract whereby the payment of money is assured on death (except death by accident only) of the happening of any contingency dependent on human life, and any contract which is subject to payment of premiums for a term dependent on human life and shall be deemed to include- (a) the granting of disability and double or triple indemnity accident benefits, if so provided in the contract of insurance, (b) the granting of annuities upon human life, and (c) the granting of superannuation allowance and annuities payable out of any fund applicable solely to the relief and maintenance of persons engaged or who have been engaged in any particular profession, trade or employment or of the dependants of such persons. " In view of this definition of "life insurance business" it is clear that the scheme as the present one adopted by the employees of the Municipal corporation, Jabalpur, will not fall within the ambit of "life insurance business" and, therefore, section 30 will not be operative. The Controller of Insurance has said that section 44 (f) of the Life Insurance Corporation act, 1956 will not apply to this scheme. It appears that no one has bothered to see what is life insurance business. As discussed earlier, section 30 will not come into operation in view of the scheme as it will not fall within the definition of life insurance business and, therefore, question of section 44 does not arise. ( 5. ) APART from it, it is clear that the order passed by the State government stopping the scheme and referring the matter to the Central government or the Controller of Insurance is also without jurisdiction. ( 5. ) APART from it, it is clear that the order passed by the State government stopping the scheme and referring the matter to the Central government or the Controller of Insurance is also without jurisdiction. As discussed earlier, section 421 does not empower the State Government to pass an order as it has been passed in this case, as section 421 provides: " (1) If the Government is of opinion that the execution of any resolution or order of the Corporation or of any other authority or officer subordinate thereto or the doing of any act which is about to be done or is being done by or on behalf of the Corporation, is not in conformity with law or with the rules or bye-laws made thereunder, or is likely to lead to a breach of the peace or to cause injury or annoyance to the public or to any class or body of persons or is likely to cause waste of or damage to Municipal funds the Government may, by order in writing, suspend the execution of such resolution or order or prohibit the doing of any such act, (2) A copy of such order of the Government shall be sent to the corporation by the Government, (3) On receipt of copy of the order as aforesaid, the Corporation may, if it is of opinion that the resolution, order or act is not in contravention or excess of the powers conferred by any law for the time being in force, or the execution of the resolution or the doing of the act is not likely to cause waste of or damage to the Municipal funds, make a representation to the Government against the said order, (4) The Government may, after considering the said representation, either cancel, modify or confirm the order passed by it under section (1) or take such other action in respect of the matter as may in the opinion of the Government be just or expedient having regard to all the circumstances of the case. " It is clear that section 421 confers powers on the State Government to modify, suspend or cancel a resolution of the Corporation if it falls within the ambit of the language of section 421. Apparently this scheme does not fall within the ambit of section 421. " It is clear that section 421 confers powers on the State Government to modify, suspend or cancel a resolution of the Corporation if it falls within the ambit of the language of section 421. Apparently this scheme does not fall within the ambit of section 421. It is also clear that no question of municipal funds arises in this case as the scheme is wholly run on contributions made by the employees and not on the funds of the Corporation. The State Government had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order stopping the scheme. ( 6. ) THE petition is allowed. The orders passed by the State Government and the Controller of Insurance are hereby quashed and it is directed that the scheme shall be run by the Corporation as already sanctioned. In the circumstances, parties are directed to bear their own costs. Security amount be refunded to the petitioners. ( 7. ) LEARNED counsel appearing for Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 prays for leave to appeal. In view of the circumstances stated above in this order, in our opinion it is not a fit case for grant of leave. The prayer is, therefore, rejected. ( 8. ) CERTIFIED copy of the order be given to the counsel for respondents nos. 4 and 5 on payment of necessary charges early. Petition allowed.