ORDER: 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 and 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 S. 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 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 facie 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 s lid 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 make an enquiry and submit a report. It also appears that the Supreintendent 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 the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad. Thereafter the said report was forwarded by the Supreintendant 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 lodging 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 malpracrice and misappropriation made by some of the Municipal Commissioners. 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 malpracrice 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 for 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 bringing the offenders 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. 4. The Chairman of the said Municipality, the respondent No. 6, herein, affirmed an affidavit and in paragraph 14 of the said affidavit, the Chairman of the said Municipality stated that the District Magistrate is in seisin of the matter and as such, the writ petition is not maintainable It was further stated by the Chairman of the said Municipality that the District Magistrate has no locus standi in the scheme of the Bengal Municipal Act. It was further stated that the Bengal Municipal Act provides for provision for audit of accounts ad inspection of records and the writ petitioners, if they have any genuine grievance, should have resorted to alternative remedy and no prima facie case has been made out in the writ petition for intervention by this Court. 5. It was further stated that the Bengal Municipal Act provides for provision for audit of accounts ad inspection of records and the writ petitioners, if they have any genuine grievance, should have resorted to alternative remedy and no prima facie case has been made out in the writ petition for intervention by this Court. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State at the time of the hearing of the application produced before this Court a xerox copy of the Memo No. 2064/L.S.G./E. N. I, Barhampur dated 5.11.84. By the said Memo, the District Magistrate, Murshidabad, forwarded to the Chairman of the Kandi Municipality a copy of the report of the Superintendent of Police, Murshidadad under Memo No. 2029/DEB dated 15.9.84 with a request to lodge an FIR with the local police station against the individuals who are directly or indirectly involved with the matter of misuse and misappropriation of government money as stated by the Superintendent of Police in his report under reference. 6. It appears that the Chairman of the said Municipality Sri Radha Mohan Sinha who affirmed an affidavit-in-opposition before this Court on 7th January, 1985, suppressed the fact that the District Magistrate forwarded to the said deponent the enquiry report of the Superintendent of Police was submitted to him by the District Magistrate and the fact that the said deponent was requested to lodge F.I.R with the local police station against the individuals who are involved in the misuse and misappropriation of the government money. It is very unfortunate that the Chairman of the Municipality deliberately suppressed the said letter of the District Magistrate a copy whereof produced before this Court by the learned advocate appearing for the State clearly shows that the Chairman of the said Municipality had made deliberately a misstatement on oath before this Court. 7. Mr. Moitra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Chairman of the Municipality, took a preliminary objection that the petitioners have no locas standi to move this application. 7. Mr. Moitra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Chairman of the Municipality, took a preliminary objection that the petitioners have no locas standi to move this application. The contention has no force inasmuch as the petitioner who are the tax payers of the Municipality, have the right to move the court if it is established that because of any illegal or unlawful exercise of powers and/or any misappropriation of municipal funds, the Municipal authorities are responsible and that because of misappropriation of funds the burden on the tax payers would ultimately increase and in any event, the misuse of municipal fund injuriously affects the interest of tax payers. The tax payers have every right to move a writ petition if they are prejudicially affected by the misuse and misappropriation of municipal funds. 8. Mr. Kashi Kanta Moitra, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Chairman of the said Municipality, submitted before this Court that the Chairman of the Municipality could not lodge F.I.R inasmuch as there were allegations against the Chairman and the Chairman, if he is an accused of offence, cannot be compelled to lodge an F. I. R against persons including himself and that if any order is passed directing the Chairman of the Municipality to lodge eomplaint against him, that would amount to violation of the protection guaranteed under Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India wherein it was provided that no person accused of an offence, shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. In the instant case, the District Magistrate on the basis of the report of investigation made by the police authorities requested the Chairman of the Municipality to lodge F.I.R against the persons who are directly or indirectly involved in misappropriation of the municipal fund and that when Mr. Moitra, appearing on behalf of the Chairman, admits that in the said report the Chairman is also involved in the matter and that the Chairman cannot be compelled to lodge F.I.R, that would amount to compel the Chairman to act as a complainant when be himself is an accused. 9. This is a very peculiar situation The Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 did not provide any provision to overcome such a situation as disclosed in this case. 9. This is a very peculiar situation The Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 did not provide any provision to overcome such a situation as disclosed in this case. At the same time, in the absence of any provision of Bengal Municipal Act, the person or persons concerned who have misappropriated Municipal funds, cannot be allowed to escape prosecution for want of a clear provision in the Act itself. It also appears that the charge of misappropriation is not a cognizable case and that in the instant case a formal F I. R. is to be lodged with the police authorities to undertake investigation under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Now question is who is to lodge such an FIR. The Magistrate has forwarded an investigation report in which it was found commission of some offence and requested the Chairman of the Municipality to lodge F. I. R s with the local police station. But as the Chairman is one of such accused, the Chairman cannot be compelled to lodge such an F. I. R. 10. It appears that under S. 445 of the Bengal Municipal Act, the Director, Local Bodies have been given power of supervision over the local bodies including the municipalities and S. 445A of the said Act provides power on the State Government to call for documents, return and information from the Commissioner. In the instant Case when it transpires that the municipal funds have been misappropriated by some municipal commissioners and the Chairman was involved in the matter, the State Government could invoke the power under S. 585 and thereafter could have proceeded against the Municipality by supervision or otherwise, but that has not been done and if that was done in that event, the Administrator appointed in this behalf could have lodged such F.I.R. It appears that the State Government was compeltely remaining silent in the matter. The Director of Local Bodies who have been added as respondent No. 12 in the writ petition, also did not exercise his power under S. 545 of the Bengal Municipal Act presumably because there is no express provision in the Act to bring the offenders into justice under the Bengal Municipal Act in such circumstances. The Bengal Municipal Commissioners and/or Chairman, if they have committed any offence, cannot get any protection and cannot escape form prosecution. The Bengal Municipal Commissioners and/or Chairman, if they have committed any offence, cannot get any protection and cannot escape form prosecution. That would be against public interest as well as against the interest of the tax payers. If the Municipal Authorities committed an offence and if there is no express provision in the Bengal Municipal Act for proceeding against the municipal authorities in respect of the offence committed by them. The provision of S. 545 of the Bengal Municipal Act has to be construed in such a manner which provides power upon the Director of the Local Bodies to take steps in the matter in accordance with law. Section 545 of the said Act provides power of supervision upon the Director of Local Bodies. Section 545 does not provide any express power for taking up any follow-up action if anything comes out during supervision. The legislature never intended to confer power of supervision only for mere supervision without anything more. The power of supervision would be meaningless and will be frustrated if the authorities concerned are prevented form taking any follow-up action on the basis of the reports and/or information received on supervision which discloses commission of offence. Accordingly I hold that S. 545 of the said Act confers powers upon the Director of Local Bodies to take steps in accordance with law against the persons responsible for misappropriation and this power is incidental and ancillary to the power of supervision. Section 545 cannot be stated to mean that the Director of Local Bodies have only power to supervise, but have no power to take steps or to take any legal action, if anything wrong is found on the basis of inspection and supervision of the records and documents pertaining to the affairs of the said municipality. Maxwell's Interpretation of Statures, 11th Edition, contains a statement at page 350 that "whore an Act confers a jurisdiction, it impliedly also grants the powers of doing all such acts or employing such means, as are essentially necessary to its execution." 11. It is also firmly established rule that an express grant of statutory power carries with it by necessary implication the authority to use all reasonable means to make such grant effective. It is also firmly established rule that an express grant of statutory power carries with it by necessary implication the authority to use all reasonable means to make such grant effective. The powers which have been conferred by S. 545 of the said Act on the Director of Local Bodies with the widest possible amplitude must carry with him necessary implications all powers and duties incidental and necessary to make the exercise of all those powers fully effective. Section 545 of the Bengal Municipal Act confers such powers upon the Director of Local Bodies to take steps against the person or persons concerned against whom there arc serious allegations of misappropriation of the Municipal Funds. 12. Accordingly, I direct the respondent No.3 to forward to the respondent No. 12, the Director of Local Bodies, State of West Bengal the enquiry report and all other papers which were forwarded by the District Magistrate Murshidabad to the Chairman of the Kandi Municipality on the basis of complaints against some municipal commissioners of Kandi Municipality of misuse and misappropriation of Government money by the Memo No. 2064/ L.S. G/E.N. dated 5.11.1984 within a period of 4 weeks from today. Similarly, the Chairman of the Municipality, the respondent No. 5 herein is also directed to forward all papers which were forwarded by the District Magistrate, Murshidabad to the respondent No. 12 and the respondent No. 12 is directed to Judge F.I.R. with the Kandi Police Station for taking action against the persons who are directly or indirectly involved with the misuse and misappropriation of the government money as stated by the Superintendent of Police in accordance with law. Such an F.I.R should be lodged within a period of 6 weeks from the date of the receipt of the report in question from the office of the District Magistrate, Murshidabad and/or Chairman of Kandi Municipality. In the result, the writ petition succeds to the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs. Application allowed: directions given.