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

1997 Supreme(SC) 576

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
G. S. Gill – Respondent


ORDER

1. As per the Office Report dated 13-9-1996, notice sent to the first respondent was received back by the Registry with the postal endorsement "No such person" indicating avoidance thereof on his part. Consequently, he was set ex parte. The second respondent was directed to file counter-affidavit. Even today the first respondent is not appearing either in person or through counsel.

2. Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the second respondent.

3. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh on 22-11-1995 in LPA No. 351 of 1981.

4. The admitted facts are that the first respondent, a general candidate, was appointed as a Junior Technical Assistant in the Department of Industries of the State of Punjab. The post of Assistant Superintendent, Quality Marking Centre, (Textile), i.e., in the next promotional cadre, is the single post in that cadre. The said post was reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates as per the roster and in view of the judgment of this Court in Arati Ray Choudhury v. Union of India [(1974) 1 SCC 87 : 1974 SCC (L&S) 73]. Bhagat Ram, the second respondent who was a
















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