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

1968 Supreme(MP) 116

P.V.Dixit, G.P.Singh
Shankarlal – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Y.S. Dharmadhikari for petitioner;
K.K. Dubey, Government Advocate for respondent No.1

ORDER

Singh, J.

1. The petitioners who are six in number are employees of the Municipal Council, Sagar and are employed as lecturers and teachers in Municipal Higher Secondary Schools of Sagar. By orders of the State Government issued in June 1968 which are exhibited as Annexure C, D and E, the petitioners have been transferred from Sagar to different places in schools belonging to other Municipal Councils. The petitioners are aggrieved by these transfers and have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for issuance of proper writs to have the orders of transfers quashed.

2. The only point agreed by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the State Government has no power of transferring lecturers and teachers of one Municipal Council to another Municipal Council In reply the learned Government Advocate has supported the orders under section 94 (7) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961.

3. Section 94 in so far as it is relevant for the present case reads as follows:-

"94. Appointment of staff:-

(1) Every Council having an annual income of five lakhs of rupees or more shall subject to Rules framed under section 95, appoint a Revenue Officer and an Accoun






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