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

1996 Supreme(SC) 1480

K.RAMASWAMY, G.B.PATTANAIK, FAIZAN UDDIN
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Madhav S/o Gajanan Chaubal – Respondent


ORDER

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

2. On the last occasion when the matter had come up after notice, since the respondents were not represented either in person or through counsel and when the counsel had pointed out the decision followed by the Tribunal, namely, Dr. Chakradhar Pasvan v. State of Bihar1, this Court had referred the matter to three-Judge Bench. Thus, the matter has come up to-day. Even now, none is appearing for the respondents; nor are they appearing in person. We have taken the assistance of Shri Goswami, learned senior counsel. We requested him to place on record the decisions for or against him. He has fairly argued case.

3. The admitted facts are that in the National Savings Scheme Service, the Government had created various posts upto the post of Superintendent; there are number of posts but there is only one post of Secretary. This post is a feeder post for promotion as Regional Deputy Director in which category there are several posts. The Government applied the rule of reservation by rotation to the vacancies in the post of Secretary. 40 point roster is also being applied to these vacancies. In the post of Secretary, point No. 4 vacancy was reserved for Sched


















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