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

1977 Supreme(MP) 868

SHIVDAYAL, K.K.DUBE
Manmohan Singh Thakre – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of M. P. – Respondent


Short Note :

The petitioner, at all material times, was employed as a Patwari in tahsil Kawardha of District Durg. The services of the petitioner were temporary. He was served with one month's notice (Annexure R-2), dated 16-8-1971. Thereafter, by an order dated 9-9-1971 (Annexure R-1), the petitioner's services were terminated.

The petitioner had been dismissed from the Government service earlier while holding the post of a Mal Chaprasi.

Held : Under section 104 of the Code, the Collector has been designated the person who shall appoint a Patwari. Under section 22 of the Code, the Sub-Divisional Officer exercised such powers of a Collector as the State Government by notification directed. By Notification No 11429-CR-635VII N-2 published in the Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra dated 9-10-1959 and notification No. 13691-CR-770-VII-N (Rules), published in the Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra dated 1-10-1960, the State Government in exercise of the powers under section 22 of the Code directed all the Sub-Divisional Officers to exercise powers of a Collector under sub-section (2) of section 104 of the Code. There is, therefore, no contention in the submission that the Sub-Divisional Officer had no power to




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