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

1991 Supreme(SC) 76

K. RAMASWAMY, KULDIP SINGH
Director, Lift Irrigation Corporation LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Pravatkiran Mohanty – Respondent


Advocates:
G.L.SANGHI, M.A.Firoz, P.N.MISHRA, R.K.MEHTA, Uma Jain

JUDGMENT

K. RAMASWAMY, J.— These three appeals are against the judgment of the Orissa High Court in O.J.C. No. 936 of 1979. The Division Bench allowed the writ petition and quashed the gradation lists of Sub-Assistant Engineers (Electrical) and Sub-Assistant Engineers (Mechanical), Annexures 5 and 6 before the High Court and the promotions given to the respondents 4 and 5 therein Annexure 7. The government and the corporation were directed to consider the question of promotion treating the writ petitioner and the respondents as belonging to two cadres of Sub-Assistant Engineer (Electrical) and (Mechanical). These three appeals were filed, one by the Corporation, another by the State Government and the third one by the aggrieved employees.

2. The facts are simple. Shri Bidura Charan Mohapatra, respondent 6/appellant 1 in the third appeal, a diploma holder in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, was appointed as Mechanical Supervisor on August 24, 1962 in the pay scale of Rs 215-396. Shri Parijay Ray, respondent 7/appellant 2, equally possessed of diploma in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, was appointed in the same scale of pay as a Mechanical Supervisor on November 5, 1962.




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