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

2008 Supreme(MP) 450

VINEY MITTAL
CHHOGALAL GATTUJI SOLANKI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MP – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.P.JOSHI, V.K.Patwari,

Judgment

( 1. ) THIS order shall dispose of six writ petitions being w. P. No. 2861/2006 (8), W. P. No. 2862/2006 (8), W. P. No. 2863/2006 (8), w. P. No. 2864/2006 (8), W. P. No. 6702/2006 (8) and W. P. No. 310/2007 (8) as the facts in these cases are identical and similar contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the parties. For the sake of convenience, the facts are borrowed from W. P. No. 2861/2006 (8 ).

( 2. ) THE petitioner-Chhogalal was initially appointed on the post of Proudh shiksha Paryavekshak (hereinafter referred to as Adult Education Supervisor) in the Social Welfare Department of the State Government w. e. f, July 25, 1994. The services of the Adult Education Supervisor were declared surplus and as a result thereof, the said employees were transferred/posted on various posts in the school Education Department. As a matter of fact, the School Education department was even declared their parent department. Subsequently an order dated June 6, 1998 was issued by the State Government, whereby the services of the Adult Education Supervisors, who had earlier been sent to the Education department, were ordered to be absorbed as Upper Division Teachers. A copy of














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