ISHWAR CHAND Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 (the Act) came into force on 1/2/1962. Ishwar Chand, the appellant before us, was employed in the Municipal council, Burhanpur as an accountant from a date prior to the coming into force of the Act. The Municipal council by the resolution dated 30/3/1962 created a post of accounts officer. As required under Section 94 of the Act the copies of the resolution were sent to the Collector and to the State government for grant of sanction. The State government granted the necessary sanction by the order dated 23/4/1964. Thereafter, sometime in the year 1964 the appellant was appointed to the newly created post of accounts officer. The said appointment was approved by the State government and finally the appellant was confirmed against the post of accounts officer in the Municipal council, Burhanpur.

(2.) The pay scale of the post of accounts officers working in various Municipal councils was revised with effect from 1/4/1964 in accordance with the recommendations of Tarachand Pay Commission. The appellant was paid salary under the revised pay scale till 28/2/1965. Thereafter till 30/9/1966 he was reverted to the unrevised pay scale on the ground that the Municipal council was not in a position to meet the burden of the revision of the pay scale. However, from 1/10/1966 till 30/4/1970 the appellant drew his salary in accordance with the revised pay scale but was not permitted to draw increments.

(3.) The Municipal council redesignated the appellant as accountant with effect from 1/5/1970 and started paying him the salary of the said post which was lesser than the salary of the post of accounts officer to which he was initially appointed. The appellant challenged the action of the respondents by way of a civil suit seeking a declaration that he was entitled to hold the post of accounts officer and was entitled to draw the salary, allowances etc. of the said post. Various other reliefs were also sought in the civil suit. The trial court decreed the suit. The Lower Appellate court, however, set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and dismissed the suit. The High court in second appeal upheld the judgment of the Lower Appellate court. This appeal by way of special leave is against the judgment of the Lower Appellate court as upheld by the High court.