AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Madhavan Nair, J.—In this case the question when an application has been made for reinstatement u/s 56(4), Local Poards Act, the
applicant can afterwards apply u/s 57 of the Act to the District Judge to restore him does not strictly speaking arise for the reason that the
application to the Board was made subject to the applicant''s right of proceeding u/s 57.
Exhibit I should be treated as the respondent''s application to the Board as the other application was on record. Even otherwise, I am not
satisfied that the exercise by the respondent of his right u/s 56, Clause (4) would take away his right of applying to the Court u/s 57 of the Act.
There is no provision in the Act to show that the rights are alternative and not concurrent. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with costs.