RAJDHAR PRASAD SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was employed as Lower Division Clerk in Zila Panchayat, Guna. He has assailed in this matter the order Annexure P -10, passed on 2 -6 -1988 by the Secretary, Zila Panchayat. By that order, he has been superannuated on his attaining age of 55 years on 3 -6 -1988.

(2.) THE short contention pressed by his counsel is that statutory rules have been given a go -bye in rendering the impugned order. Relevant rules are extracted in the petition. Those are parts of Rule 154 of M. B. Panchayat Niyam, Samvat 2008. Admittedly, the petitioner was a Class III employee and, therefore, reliance is placed on the following provisions which we extract from Annexure R -1 of the return : .........[vernacular ommited text]........... However, at para 5 of the petition is extracted other parts of Rule 154 and those are also reproduced below as the afore -extracted provision has substituted sub -rule (1) of Rule 154 by amendment made in 1968. Sub -rules (2) and (3) are as follows : .........[vernacular ommited text]...........

(3.) AS per Annexure P -10, however, without stating any reason therein, the petitioner was superannuated on his attaining the age of 55 years. There is no manifestation in the order of events that preceded or even of the requirements of statutory provisions.