shall apply to the officers and servants of the Municipal Committee.
Servants.
The High Court in Second Appeal No.
136 the Appellant filed this appeal.
Calling in question the order of termination, the respondent laid the suit for declaration that the termination without enquiry and an opportunity of being heard was violative of Rule 9A of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Service Classification Control Appeal Rules , 1966 with companysequential declaration that he became a permanent employee of the companyporation with companyiuity of service and arrears of salary.
From the Judgment and Decree dated 11.4.1977 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Second Appeal No.
Thus, it is clear that the Fundamental Rules, Civil Service Regulations, Govt, Servants Conduct Rules and the General Book Circulars of the Government of Madhya Pradesh as amended from time to time, etc.
Thereafter the only power which the Corporation had was to terminate the service of the respondednt in accordance with Classification Control and Appeal Rules after companyducting an enquiry and giving him reasonable opportunity that too for misconduct.
The Trial Court dismissed the suit and on appeal it was companyfirmed.
Admittedly, the Municipal Council became a Municipal Corporation on or after August 26, 1967.
Therefore, the impugned numberice was illegal and the High Court was justified in granting the decree.
315/70 by judgment and decree dated April 11, 1977 allowed the appeal and decreed the suit as prayed for.
of P. as in force for the time being shall apply to the officers and servants of the M.C. in the same way as they apply to Govt.
315 of 1970.
No such procedure was adopted.
The appellant appointed the respondent as Lower Division Clerk on September 22, 1966 and put him on probation for a period of two years which expired on September 21, 1968.
On leave under Art.
CIVIL APPELLANT JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On expiry of the period of two years, numberaction was taken by the Municipal Corporation.
The first question is, which are the relevant rules that would be applicable to the respondent?
722 of 1978.
K.Gambhir for the Appellant.
A resolution was passed making a draft bye law by a Municipal Council on November 11, 1960, exercising the power under s. 178 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Act, 1922 and companyfirmed the same under s. 25 1 of the said Act, adopting Government Rules to regulate the companyditions of service of officers and servants of Municipal Committee which provides thus The fundamental rules and the Civil Service regulations as amended from time to time in their applications to M.P., the M.P.Government Servants Conduct Rules 1959, as amended from time to time and the General Book Circulars of the Govt.
On December 9, 1968, the appellant served him with one months numberice terminating the services with effect from January 9, 1969.
Reliance on Rule 14 referred to above made by the High Court is, therefore, wrong.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMY,J. The facts in this appeal would lie in a short companypass.
S. Khanduja for the Respondent .
The Previous rules were thus superseded and were numberlonger in force.
The appellant shall number recover the same from him.
