S.P.SRIVASTAVA
Tilak Singh Tomar – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
S.P. Srivastava, J.
1. Heard Shri Arun Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri K. N. Gupta, Government Advocate representing the respondent No. I/State on advance notice.
2. Perused the record.
3. The petitioner has approached this Court by means of the present writ petition praying for a direction requiring the respondents to continue in service of the respondents No. 2 and 3 on the post of Time Keeper and prohibiting them not to terminate his services otherwise than in accordance with law. He has further prayed for a direction requiring the respondents to absorb him in a permanent post according to the rules applicable to the Municipalities and for quashing of the order dated December 31, 1999 issued by the State Government. It has also been prayed that the respondents be directed to release his salary for the month of December 1999 and onwards."
4. The facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner claims that he had been engaged by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Ambah on daily wage basis and has throughout been discharging his duties attached to the post of Time Keeper since April 27, 1995.
3. Khagesh Kumar v. Inspector General of Registration, Uttar Pradesh
4. Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana, 1994 (4) SCC 138
5. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Suresh Kumar Sharma
6. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. v. Krishna Kant and Ors., 1995 (5) SCC 75
7. Premier Automobile case, 1976 (1) SCC 496
9. Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh v. Anil Kumar Mishra and Ors., AIR 1994 SC 1638
11. Chandigarh Administration and Anr. v. Jagjit Singh and Anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.