LAWS(MPH)-1972-3-22

VISHWANATH VERMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

Decided On March 30, 1972
VISHWANATH VERMA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF M.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, filed by an Assistant Professor of a Government College challenging the order, dated 29 -8 -1962 (Petitioner's Aunexure -C), which was purported to have been issued from the office of the Director of Public Instructions and which, the 6th respondent, B.L. Goyal, was said to have signed for the Director of Public Instructions. According to the petitioner, the said order was not only in contravention of section 115(7) of the States Re -organisation Act, 1956, but also on merits, it was had inasmuch as it had given unjustified preference to members of the administrative services in the Education department over the members of the Teaching side. The petitioner's contention has been that on account of this unwarranted and illegal action of the Director of Public Instructions, the respondents were unduly promoted; while the petitioner being on the Teaching side in the Education department, had to suffer.

(2.) THE respondents' contention is that the equation of posts on the administrative and the teaching sides had been correctly and legally made in accordance with the principles laid down by the Central Government and as such, there was no violation of section 115(7) of the States Re -organisation Act, 1956, nor did this circular letter fixing the seniority of the two branches in the executive and the teaching side, in the services interfered with the seniority fixed by the Integration Order passed by the Central Government. That is the disputed question raised in the present writ petition.

(3.) THE petitioner's main grievance regarding this equation of posts is with regard to Item (b) above wherein Category No.II, Administrative side and Category No. IV, Teaching side, have been equated together and as such, Category No. II, Administrative side, has been given preference over category No, V of Teaching side. According to the petitioner, Category No. II on the Administrative side, ought to have been equated with Category No. V on the Teaching side.