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

1980 Supreme(SC) 141

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, V.R.KRISHNA IYER
N. Chandramouli – Appellant
Versus
Chikkalakkaiah – Respondent


JUDGMENT

KRISHNA IYER, J.:— The only question raised in this appeal relates to the seniority of one of two groups of candidates in the Karnataka State. We must make it perfectly plain that we are concerned only with the specific rules placed before us and limit the operation of our observations to these rules and orders - no wider import or impact is available nor do we intend to affect other States and other services governed by other systems or rules.

2. The Karnataka State, on States Reorganisation, was composed of various territories drawn from various former States including what is known as the old Mysore State. May Government servants from those States were allotted to the Karnataka State on 1-11-56, the date of the State Reorganisation. There was a gradation list prepared in regard to the allottees coming from various former States, and the Central Government, acting under its power under S. 115 (7), sanctioned a final gradation list for the Karnataka State also. As per that list, the employees already regularized before 1-11-56 were put above temporary servants for the obvious reason that temporary hands would take their place below the regular hands. Nevertheless, those te













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