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

2001 Supreme(SC) 387

B.N.KIRPAL, RUMA PAL
Vidhya Dhar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
G. B. Patnaik – Respondent


ORDER

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. By order dated 22nd September, 2000, the petitioner herein was directed to be appointed to the post of Medical Officer to which he had been selected. It was further ordered that the letter of appointment should be issued within six weeks from that day.

3. When the letter of appointment was not issued, a registered A/D legal notice dated 18th November, 2000 was sent to the respondents. The notice was sent to the Chief Secretary and two other officers. Not having received any response, the present petition for taking appropriate action against the respondents was filed. In response to the petition, affidavits of G.B. Pattanaik, IAS, Secretary, Medical Education and G.D. Tripathi, IAS, Director, Ayurvedic and Unani Services, have been filed. Though in paragraph 2 of the affidavit of G.B. Patnaik an unconditional apology is purported to be tendered, it is stated that the charge has been purged, inasmuch as a letter of appointment has been issued to the petitioner. A reading of the affidavit discloses that even though G.B. Patnaik was a Secretary in the Department in September, 2000, the matter was not brought to his notice till N






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