A.N.RAY, P.N.BHAGWATI, A.ALAGIRISWAMI, K.K.MATHEW, H.R.KHANNA
Mohammad Shujat Ali: Sunkara Rattaiah: V. Markendeya: M. Nagender Rao – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India: State Of A. P. : State Of A. P. : State Of A. P. – Respondent
Judgment
BHAGWATI, J.:- These writ petitions and appeals are broadly divisible into two groups, one group consisting of Writ Petition No. 385 of 1969 and Civil Appeals Nos. 601-605 and 954-955 of 1972 and the other consisting of Writ Petition No. 218 of 1970. We shall first state the facts in regard to Writ Petition No. 385 of 1969 and Civil Appeals Nos. 601-605 and 954-955 of 1972 and then proceed to deal with Writ Petition No. 218 of 1970 which raises a slightly different dispute.
2. Writ Petition No. 385 of 1969 and Civil Appeals Nos. 601-605 and 954-955 of 1972 concern a dispute which has been going on since the last over fifteen years in regard to absorption and integration of Supervisors of the erstwhile State of Hyderabad in the Engineering Service of the reorganised State of Andhra Pradesh. It would be convenient to start the narration of facts with a description of the organization and structure of the Engineering Service in the erstwhile State of Hyderabad, for the petitioners/appellants were Supervisors belonging to that Service immediately prior to the reorganization of the States on 1st November, 1956 and it is their contention that on absorption and integration into the
N. Raghavendra Rao v. Deputy Commissioner. South Kanara, Mangalore
State of Mysore v. L. Narasingh Rao
State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa
referred : State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa
State of Haryana v. S. J. Bahadur
relied upon : N. Subba Rao v. Union of India
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.