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

1987 Supreme(SC) 922

M.M.DUTT, RANGANATH MISRA
Gainda Ram – Appellant
Versus
M. C. D – Respondent


(1) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. There are two Writ Petition. In one writ petition the petitioners are eight in number and in the other their number is 12. These are Clinic Beldars in the employment of the respondent-Municipal Corporation. There is no dispute that there are 43 posts of Clinical Beldars which have been sanctioned for the entire year. Petitioners claim that they have been working as Clinic Beldars against such posts, in view of the fact that service is taken for the full year on regular basis for this class of Beldars, it stands apart from other Beldars and should be treated as a class by itself. We agree with the counsel for the petitioners that in this view of the matter they are entitled to regularisation. It is pointed out that in November, 1987, there has been an order terminating the services of all the petitioners and thereafter some have been called back to service and others are still out of employment.

(2) LEARNED counsel for the respondents points out that there are others similarly placed like the petitioners and if an order for regularisation is made, it should provide for regularisation giving preference to those who may be the

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