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

1991 Supreme(MP) 252

K.M.AGRAWAL, P.N.S.CHAUHAN
Jamuna Prasad Pandoria – Appellant
Versus
Director, Nagar Prashashan – Respondent


ORDER

K.M. Agarwal, J.

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner is challenging his transfer order dated 31-7-1989 (Annexure A-1) from Gotegaon Municipality to Kaymore Municipality as a Lower Division Clerk, (in short, the "L.D.C"), and makes a prayer for allowing him to work as L.D.C. in Gotegaon Municipality.

2. The petitioner was appointed as an L.D.C. in Municipal Council, Gotegoan by order dated 19-8-1968 (Annexure A-2) in the time scale of Rs. 80-160 plus Rs. 35/- as dearness allowance and ever since the date of his appointment, he has been working there as an L.D.C. By the impugned order he was transferred to Municipal Council, Kaymore in the same capacity. The petitioner contends that the post of L.D.C. is not transferable and, therefore, the impugned order is bad. The respondent No. 2 has filed his return and has tried to justify the order of transfer by referring to Section 94(7) of the M. P. Municipalities Act, 1961, (in short, the "Act").

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that looking to the post held by the petitioner, the transfer order cannot be justified Under Section 94(7) of the Act, which reads as
















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