VIJAY SINGH YADAV Vs. BHOPAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and validity of the orders dtd. 7/5/2018 (Annexure P/10) and 5/3/2019 (Annexure P/13) has been assailed by the petitioner saying that the said orders are apparently illegal and deserve to be set aside. The petitioner has also claimed that after setting aside the impugned orders direction be issued to the respondents to reinstate him in service on the post of Revenue Officer with all consequential benefits of salary and arrears.

(2.) To resolve the controversy, as has been raised by the parties by advancing their submission and also on the basis of record available, it is appropriate to mention necessary facts of the case, which in nutshell are as follows:-

(3.) The petitioner was working on the post of Assistant Grade I and was officiating as an Incharge Revenue Officer with the respondent-department i.e. Bhopal Development Authority (For short 'BDA'). As per the definition given under Article 12 of the Constitution India, the Bhopal Development Authority comes within the definition of 'State'. The service conditions of the petitioner are governed with the statutory rules i.e. known as Madhya Pradesh Development Authority Services (Officers and Servant) Recruitment Rules, 1987 (For short 'Rules, 1987'). The respondent-department has adopted the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 for the purpose of disciplinary proceeding.