SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 191

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
State Of H. P. – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Kumar Verma – Respondent


ORDER

Delay condoned.

2. We have heard the counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave arises from the orders passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. In this case in CWP No. 722/93 dated 10.9.1993, the Division Bench of the High Court has disposed of the matters on the ground that the respondents were re-engaged as Assistant Development Officers on daily wages pursuant to the direction by it. It is settled law that having made rules of recruitment to various services under the State or to a class of posts under the State, the State is bound to follow the same and to have the selection of the candidates made as per recruitment rules and appointments shall be made accordingly. From the date of discharging the duties attached to the post the incumbent becomes a member of the services. Appointment on daily wage basis is not an appointment to a post according to the Rules.

3. It is seen that the project in which the respondents were engaged had come to an end and that, therefore, they have necessarily been terminated for want of work. The Court cannot give any directions to re-engage them in any other work or appoint them against existing vacancies. Otherwise, the judicial p





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top