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

1989 Supreme(SC) 142

K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY, K.N.SINGH
State Of Maharashtra – Appellant
Versus
Jagannath Achyut Karandikar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J. :— These two appeals by special leave are by the State of Maharashtra. They are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Bombay dated 12th January, 1983 by which the High Court issued the following two directives to the State Government :

"(1) To recast the Revised/Final seniority list dated 20-12-1982 vis-a-vis the persons shown in the category of Late Passing and assign them seniority strictly in accordance with Rule2 and the other Government orders referred to in Paragraph 96 of the judgment; and

(2) The seniority in the Superintendents. cadre so fixed should also be considered as seniority for further promotions."

2. The background to these directives is, in outline, this : Respondents 1 to 8 are Assistant Secretaries/ Section Officers/ Superintendents in different departments of the Government of Maharashtra. The State Government prescribed departmental examinations as a condition precedent for promotion to the cadre of Superintendents. The examinations were required to be conducted every year, and the officials have to pass within the stipulated period. Those who could not pass within the time-frame would lose their seniority but they
























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