Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)Gazula Dasaratha Rama Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Others on 6 December, 1960
12. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to bring Section 12 within the prohibition enacted by Article 16 on the contention that this Article governs all offices under the State irrespective of the nature of the office. The learned counsel cites the two judgments of the Supreme Court in Dasaratha Rama Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, and Ramappa v. Sangappa, as exemplifying this proposition.
M. Ramappa vs Sangappa And Others on 21 August, 1958
"The appointment is made by the Collector, the emoluments are granted or continued by the State, the Collector has disciplinary powers over the Village Munsif including the power to remove, suspend or dismiss him, the qualifications for appointment can be laid down by the Board of Revenue - all these show that the office is not a private office under a private employer but is an office under the State. The nature of the duties to be performed by the Village Munsif under different provisions of the law empowering him in that behalf also shows that he holds a public office. He not only aids in collecting the revenue but exercises power of a Magistrate and of a Civil Judge in petty cases. He has also certain police duties as to representing and informing about crime etc."
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Representation Of The People Act, 1950
1