Pradeep Kumar Sharma, a municipal employee whose substantive post was Revenue Sub-Inspector, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior, seeking to quash a charge-sheet dated 10.07.2020 issued by Respondent No. 2, alleging financial embezzlement while he was posted as In-charge Chief Municipal Officer (CMO) at Nagar Palika Parishad, Sabalgarh, District Morena. The petitioner contended that the authority issuing the charge-sheet lacked jurisdiction over him since his substantive post was that of Revenue Sub-Inspector. The court relied upon a coordinate bench decision in Ikrar Ahmed v. State of M.P. (W.P. No. 600/2018, decided 28.03.2019) and the Division Bench ruling in Anand Sharma v. State of M.P. (2007) 5 MPHT 85, both of which held that under Sections 89(1-A) and 90(4) of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961, the State Government and its Commissioner exercise full control—including disciplinary jurisdiction—over a person appointed as In-charge CMO, regardless of their substantive post. Applying this settled legal position, the High Court found the controversy already covered by binding precedent, effectively upholding the jurisdiction of the Additional Commissioner to issue the charge-sheet.