DWARKA PRASAD SAXENA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) THE petitioner was an employee of the former State of Madhya Bharat and was appointed on the establishment of the Board of Revenue to work as an accountant. His substantive rank was that of an Upper Division Clerk. It is not disputed that there was no post of Accountant of the Board of Revenue In the former State of Madhya Bharat. After formation of the State of Madhya Pradesh w. e. f. 1 -11 -56 the petitioner continued to work as Accountant in the Board of Revenue. By an order dated 4th January 1960. The State Government sanctioned the set up of the Board of Revenue which included one post of Accountant, I Grade Clerk (vide annexure 2) w. e. f. 1 -11 -56. By an order dated 18th May 1960 the petitioner was absorbed as an accountant, I Grade Clerk w. e. f. 1 -11 -1956 apparently on the post sanctioned by order dated 4 -1 -60. Subsequently, the matter came up for consideration before the Government and the Government thought the absorption of the petitioner against the port of Accountant was against the instructions of the General Administration Department, according to which the absorption of an allocated Government servant in the new set up could be made only in the corresponding category. As in the new set up posts of Upper Division Clerks had been sanctioned which corresponded to the post of Upper Division Clerk of the former State of Madhya Bharat which was held by the petitioner, the Government, therefore, directed that the petitioner can be absorbed as an Upper Division Clerk in the new set up w. e. f. 1 -11 -56 and not as an accountant vide order dated 28th April 1967 (vide Annexure 1). In pursuance of these directions of the Government, the President, Board of Revenue revised the order of absorption of the petitioner by order dated 9 -1 -70 (Annexure 15) and he was absorbed as an Upper Division Clerk Grade II w. e. f. 1 -11 -56. On the same date the President passed an order promoting the petitioner as an Accountant w. e. f. 15 -1 -60 (vide Annexure 15 -A).

(3.) IT being not disputed that the petitioner was not holding the post of Accountant immediately before 1 -11 -56 as no such post was sanctioned and that he was holding only the post of U.D.C, Grade II, the petitioner could be absorbed only in a corresponding post. Apart from the instructions from the Government in this behalf this is also in accordance with the provision of section 115 of the States Re -organisation Act. In fact it is not the grievance of the petitioner that the provisions of the said section have been violated in this case.