SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(SC) 560

A.M.AHMADI, S.RANGANATHAN
D. M. Bharati – Appellant
Versus
L. M. Sud – Respondent


Advocates:
H.S.Panhar

JUDGMENT

RANGANATHAN, J.:—The appellant, D. M. Bharati, challenges the validity of an order dated 30-9-76 passed by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad. By the said order, the Deputy Municipal Commissioner, consequent on the staff of the Municipal Corporation working in the Town Planning Establishment having to be absorbed in the Municipal Corporation, "reverted" the appellant from the post of junior draftsman in the Establishment and appointed him to act in the post of a tracer in the Town Development Department of the Corporation. The High Court rejected his writ petition and hnce the present appeal.

2. It is necessary to state the relevant facts. The appellant had been appointed as a tracer in the Estate Department of the Municipal Corporation on 26-6-1955 and worked there till 18th February, 1957. It appears that the Government appointed a Town Planning Officer under the provisions of S. 31 of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954. The Town Planning Officer had to be supplied with an establishment. The establishment of the Town Planning Officer was admittedly temporary. An arrangement was entered into between the two authorities t












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top