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

1996 Supreme(SC) 1310

B.L.HANSARIA, S.B.MAJMUDAR, K.RAMASWAMY
Excise Superintendent Malkapatnam, Krishna District, A. P. – Appellant
Versus
K. B. N. Visweshwara Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. These appeals by special leave arise from the order dated April 21, 1992 of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 9501/91 and batch. The admitted position is that the respondents were not sponsored through the employment exchange for selection to the 723 posts sought to be filled up from the candidates sponsored through the medium of employment exchange. The respondents independently applied for consideration of their claims but they were not considered. Consequently, they approached the Tribunal and sought direction for their appointment. Interim directions were issued to consider their cases and to appoint, if selected by the selecting authority. Though the Tribunal held that sponsorship of the candidates through the medium of employment exchange was valid and not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, since many of the candidates came to be selected tin terms of the interim direction, orders were issued to appoint the selected candidates. There is a difference of opinion in this behalf. Whereas the majority of two members held that it is not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the






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