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

1990 Supreme(SC) 190

KULDIP SINGH, P.B.SAWANT
D. N. Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
State Of M. P. – Respondent


Judgment

SAWANT, J.:- The two appellants in this case had joined the service in the Public Works Department of the respondent Madhya Pradesh State, as Overseers. They were thereafter appointed as Junior Engineers by direct recruitment the first appellant on August 29, 1969 and the second appellant on September 12, 1969. Although the High Court in its impugned judgment has stated that they were promoted as Junior Engineers from the posts of Overseers, it appears that that statement is not correct since their orders of appointment to the post of Junior Engineer which are Annexures P-1 and P-2 to the writ petition filed in the High Court show that their appointments as Junior Engineers were ,not by way of promotion. This, however, makes no difference to the issues involved in the present appeal. We have stated it to keep the record straight. The grievance of the appellants is with regard to their seniority in the next promotional post, viz., that of Assistant Engineer.

2. The Recruitment Rules which govern the said promotional post are known as Madhya Pradesh P. W. D. (Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). According to these Rules, Junior Engineers,


























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