JUDGMENT : N.L. GANGULY, J. 1. This petition is directed against a suspension order dated 9-4-1991 suspending the Petitioner. The order has been passed by Sri Binda Prasad who was the Acting Chairman of Nagar Palika, Maudaha, Hamirpur. The Petitioner challenges the aforesaid order of suspension in this Court on the following grounds: (a) that there were no displinary proceedings pending against him or under contemplation. There is a so no criminal case pending against him in respect of the financial involvement, moral turpitude either under investigation or enquiry or trial; (b) that the Acting Chairman, who passed the impugned order, was not a competent authority to pass the same; and (c) that the impugned order of suspension was passed mala fide against the Petitioner by the Acting Chairman. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has served the Respondents and the parties have exchanged affidavits. They agree to final disposal of the petition according to the Rules of the Court. 3. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner placed the provisions of Section 77B of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916. Section 77-A and 77-B of the aforesaid Act is being quoted here in under: 77-A. Power of appellate authority in disciplinary matters.--The appellate authority to which an appeal against an order of dismissal, removal or other punishment is preferred under this Act or the rules may-- (a) set aside, reduce or confirm the penalty; or (b) remit the case to the authority which imposed the penalty with such directions as it may deem fit. 77-B. Powers of suspension.--(1) The authority competent to punish an officer or servant of the board may place him under suspension- (a) where a disciplinary proceeding against him ; is contemplated or pending, or (b) where a criminal case against him in respect of an offence involving moral turpitude is under investigation, enquiry or trial. (2) Where a penalty of dismissal or removal imposed upon an officer or servant of the board, is set aside in appeal under this Act or the rules and the case is remitted for further inquiry or action or with any other directions, the officer or servant shall be deemed to have been placed or continued under suspension on and from the date of original order of dismissal or removal. (3) Where a penalty of dismissal or removal imposed upon an officer or servant of the board is set aside or declared or rendered void in consequence of or by a decision of a court of law, and the punishing authority, on a consideration of the circumstances of the case decided to hold a further enquiry against him on the allegation on which the penalty of dismissal or removal was originally imposed, the officer or servant shall be deemed to have been placed or continued under suspension by the punishing authority on and from the date of the original order of dismissal or removal. (4) An order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under this section may at any time to be revoked by the authority which made or is deemed to have made the order or by the appellate authority. (5) A board shall act under this section by a special resolution supported by not less than two-thirds of the members constituting the board. (6) An officer or servant who is placed or is deemed to have been placed under suspension shall, during the period of such suspension, be entitled to receive, instead of salary, such subsistence allowance as may be prescribed. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is admittedly an employee of the Nagar Palika, Kanpur, under the (U.P) Palika (Centralised) Services Rules, 1966. He pointed out that under the Rule 37(1) and (3) of the aforesaid Rules, it was necessary that the orders for punishment of dismissal, removal from service etc. are to be passed in accordance with the said rules, which are being quoted here as under: 37. Disciplinary proceedings (1)... . (2) The authority competent to impose the punishment of dismissal or removal from service or reduction in rank on the officers of the Centralised Services shall be the State Government. As regards other punishments, the President of the Municipal Board or the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari of the Mahapalika, as the case may be, shall be the competent authority: Provided that it shall be necessary to consult the commission before passing an order for the dismissal or removal from service or reduction in rank in respect of any such officer. As regards other punishments, the President of the Municipal Board or the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari of the Mahapalika, as the case may be, shall be the competent authority: Provided that it shall be necessary to consult the commission before passing an order for the dismissal or removal from service or reduction in rank in respect of any such officer. (3) In cases requiring immediate suspension of an officer of the Centralised Services, the power of suspending such an officer shall be exercised b y such authority as may be specified in this behalf by the Government ; and in other cases requiring suspension of an officer, reference shall be made to the Government. 4. Admittedly, the Petitioner is a Head Clerk in the Nagar Palika, Maudaha, Hamirpur, which is a class 3 post. The allegation to this effect in the petition are not disputed. 5. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner pointed out the G.O. dated 25th May, 1985 (Annexure 4' to the petition). He submitted that the G.O. dated 25-5-1985 clearly states that in cases of Nagar Palikas, if any disciplinary actions are proposed to be taken against certain employees, it would be necessary for the Administrators of the office-bearers of the Nagar Palika to communicate to the Director of the Local Bodies of the State Government for employees drawing basic salaries up to Rs. 850/- per month who shall take necessary legal action in the matter of disciplinary action against the erring employees of the Nagar Palikas. In cases of employees of Nagar Palikas drawing above Rs. 850/- as basic salary, the State Government would be the competent authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings. The G.D. referred to above has not been disputed by the Respondents. The Petitioner stated to be drawing basic salary less than Rs. 850/-. As such, the Director, Local Bodies, would be the competent authority to initiate the departmental proceedings against the Petitioner. 6. Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and after examining the record in detail, I am of the opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed on the sole ground that the suspension order was passed by the Acting Chairman of the Nagar Palika who was not the legally competent authority to pass such an order. 7. 6. Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and after examining the record in detail, I am of the opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed on the sole ground that the suspension order was passed by the Acting Chairman of the Nagar Palika who was not the legally competent authority to pass such an order. 7. Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the copy of the charge sheet against the Petitioner was sent to him and was served but the Petitioner himself is interested in delaying the matter and this Court should not interfere in such matters. There is a factual denial by the Petitioner that the charge-sheet has not been served to him. The question of service of the charge-sheet to the Petitioner is not very relevant for decision of the present petition. If the charge-sheet has not been served, as stated by the Petitioner, it is made clear that the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has made a statement after seeking instructions from his client who is present in the court that the copy of the charge-sheet would be deemed to have been served on him. 8. The next submission of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the order of suspension was passed mala-fide by the Respondent No. 2 since the Petitioner had filed a claim petition before the U.P. Public Service Commission and there is an award in his favour. The Respondents have not made full payment of the amount due. As such these actions are initiated to harass the Petitioner. Since the Petitioner has not impleaded the Acting Chairman, Respondent No. 2, by name in the petition, the persons concerned had no opportunity to explain the facts and circumstances for initiation of such action. The ground of mala fide can only succeed if opportunity to the person concerned is given. For want of non-impleadment of the person concerned by name, this Court is not inclined to decide the question of mala-fide in the present case. 9. The Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the Petitioner has committed serious financial irregularities and charge sheet has already been served. The Petitioner may be directed to appear before the disciplinary authority and show cause. 9. The Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the Petitioner has committed serious financial irregularities and charge sheet has already been served. The Petitioner may be directed to appear before the disciplinary authority and show cause. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that in view of the provisions of Rules 37(2) and (3) of the aforesaid rules and the provisions of Section 77-A and 77-B of the aforesaid Act, the authority, namely, the Vice-Chairman of the Nagar Palika who had served the charge-sheet was not competent to do so unless it was shown that the Director, Local Bodies, U.P. Government authorised or himself prepared the charge-sheet and delegated the powers to proceed with the departmental proceedings against the Petitioner to the Vice-Chairman. Since these questions require further evidence and fact, I do not propose to enter into the question at this stage. At present, this Court is concerned in the matter of adjudication of validity of the suspension order which has already been held to be illegal and without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. If the Respondents consider it necessary, they are free to take legal action according to law either for suspension afresh or proceeding departmentally as may be advised on basis of charge-sheet already filed against Petitioner. 10. The petition is allowed. Costs on parties.