JUDGMENT - M.L. PENDSE, J.:---The challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to a Notification dated March 18, 1985 issued by, the Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu and published in the Official Gazette of March 28, 1985. By the impugned notification the Administrator has constituted in respect of all Municipal Councils common cadres of the 24 posts set out in the notification. The notification is issued in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (5) of section 72 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Municipalities Act, 1968. The posts set out in the notification are of employees belonging to Class III and Class IV servants. The challenge to the notification is based on the ground that the Administrator had no powers under sub-section (5) of section 72 to constitute a common cadre of the posts set out in the notification. 2. Chapter V of the Goa, Daman and Diu Municipalities Act deals with the provisions regarding officers and servants of the Municipal Council and sub-section (2) of section 72 prescribes that the Council may, with the sanction of the Director, and if so required by the Government, create the following posts, namely : (a) a Municipal Engineer; (b) a Water Works Engineer; (c) a Municipal Health Officer; (d) a Municipal Auditor; (e) a Municipal Education Officer; and (f) any other officer as may be designated by the Government in his behalf. Sub-section (5) of section 72 reads as under : "(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette constitute, in respect of all Councils,- (a) a common cadre of the Chief Officers, (b) Common cadres of all or any of the officers specified in sub-section (2), whose minimum salary (exclusive of allowances) is not less than Rs. 225/- per month." The Administrator claims to have exercised powers under sub-section (5)(b) while Issuing the impugned notification and Shri Kakodkar, learned Counsel for the petitioners, urged that the Administrator has clearly misread the provisions of sub-section (5)(b). To attract the provisions of sub-section (5)(b), two conditions are required to be satisfied, first, that common cadre can be constituted of only those officers who are specified in sub-section (2) and second, their minimum salary, exclusive and allowances, is not less than Rs. 225/- per month. To attract the provisions of sub-section (5)(b), two conditions are required to be satisfied, first, that common cadre can be constituted of only those officers who are specified in sub-section (2) and second, their minimum salary, exclusive and allowances, is not less than Rs. 225/- per month. A plain reading of sub-section (2) of section 72 makes it clear that the posts set out in the impugned notification do not refer to officers in the categories (a) to (e). Shri Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, made a vain attempt to urge that the posts set out in the notification are of those officers who are designated by the Government in accordance with sub-section (2)(vi). It is impossible to accede to the submission of the learned Counsel. The respondents have not produced on record any notification by which are Government has designated any other officers as contemplated by sub-section (2)(vi) of section 72. Indeed the Government could not have designated any such officer, because the posts set out in the notification are held by employees belonging to Class III and Class IV servants. Realising that such a notification designating the officers under sub-section (2)(vi) is not issued by the Government. Shri Mulgaonkar contended that the recruitment rules framed by the Director of Municipal Administration should be deemed to have been designated by the Government as contemplated under sub-section (2)(vi) of section 72 of the Act. It is impossible to accede to this submission. The recruitment rules copy of which is annexed as Exhibit P-1 to the petition, are framed by the Director, Municipal Administration, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 73(2)(b) of the Act, and that provision enables the Director to frame rules in respect of the recruitment of servants whose minimum salary is Rs. 120/- or more. The Director has framed the Recruitment Rules prescribing for education, pay and allowances and other conditions of service and the method of recruitment of such officers. These rules by no stretch of imagination could be treated as designated by the Government under section 72(2)(vi) of the Act. In our judgment, the impugned notification issued by the Administrator is wholly without authority and is required to be struck down. These rules by no stretch of imagination could be treated as designated by the Government under section 72(2)(vi) of the Act. In our judgment, the impugned notification issued by the Administrator is wholly without authority and is required to be struck down. Shri Kakodkar rightly submitted that by the impugned notification the Administrator desired to transfer employees holding Class III and Class IV posts and such transfer would lead to entire demoralisation of service. Apart from this consideration, in our judgment the Administrator had no power whatsoever to issue the notification and therefore, it is required to be struck down. 3. Accordingly petition succeeds and rule is made absolute in terms of prayer (a). The respondents shall pay the costs of the respondents. Rule made absolute. -----