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

2005 Supreme(SC) 1474

ARIJIT PASAYAT, C.K.THAKKER
Jagdish Kumars – Appellant
Versus
State Of H. P. – Respondent


Judgment

Arijit Pasayat, J.—In these appeals challenge is to the legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court holding that though the appellants were eligible for regular promotion as Assistant Draftsmen, their inter-se seniority was to be reckoned with effect from the date they qualified at the departmental examinations. The judgment of the Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal (in short the ‘Tribunal’) holding that they were not eligible for promotion was held to be not correct.

2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

The appellants were recruited during the period 1974-76 as Tracer Draftsmen. Respondent Nos. 3 to 18 were appointed on such posts during the period from 1976 to 1980. Rules governing appointments of Tracers are covered by Himachal Pradesh P.W.D. Subordinate Services Class III Draftsman and Tracers Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1961 (in short ‘Rules’). The educational and technical qualifications of the candidates for the posts of Tracers, Assistant Draftsmen and others are provided under Rule 6 of the Rules. Respondent Nos. 3 to 18 possessed the qualification of Diploma in Draftsman course. According to






























































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