NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution takes exception to the order dated 31.10.2013 (Anenxure P -1) passed by Additional Commissioner, Chambal Division, Chambal. The said authority entertained and allowed the appeal filed by respondent No.4 herein and accordingly interferred with the suspension order of respondent No.4. He directed to make payment of salary for the suspension period.

(2.) SHRI Nagori, learned counsel for the appellant assailed it on the singular ground that under the relevant rules, the appeal against suspension is barred and, therefore, respondent 4 had no authority, jurisdiction and competence to entertain the said appeal. Attention of this Court is drawn on Rule 55 and 56 of M.P. Municipal Employees (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1968.

(3.) PRAYER is opposed by Shri D.P.Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.4. He submits that as per the amendment in Section 94 (3) of the Municipalities Act, 1961, the suspension cannot continue beyond one month. If the competent authority intends to continue it beyond one month, it has to take approval from the State Government. In the present case, approval was not obtained from the State Government and, therefore, appellate authority has not committed any error of law in entertaining the appeal and allowing it. Shri Singh submits that on this reason also, no interference is required in the order dated 31.10.2013.