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

2001 Supreme(SC) 650

S.N.VARIAVA, M.B.SHAH
Vinod Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Shah, J.-Leave granted.

2. Question involved in these matters is - whether the appellants who were substantively appointed in different branches of the U.P. Services of Engineers by Combined Competitive Test conducted by the Public Service Commission, U.P. are entitled to the benefit of their services in the said branches though subsequently they appeared in another competitive examination conducted by Public Service Commission, U.P. and were appointed in the Irrigation Department against permanent post by way of transfer? And also whether they are entitled to tagging of the aforesaid service in view of the Government orders?

3. By a common judgment and order dated 24.4.2000, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow dismissed the writ petition Nos.1219 (SB) and 1220 (SB) of 1998 filed by the appellants herein by holding that (1) the ratio of decision in Vijaya Kumar Shrotriya v. State of U.P. & Ors.1 is not applicable to the facts of the present case for the reason that it is not the case of the appellants that they were selected by the Public Service Commission in a combined test. There is nothing on record to indicate that their examination or i

















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