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

2007 Supreme(SC) 1193

ARIJIT PASAYAT, D.K.JAIN
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Manshu Kumbhkar – Respondent


judgment

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellant-State and its functionaries.

3.Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

One Miss Suraj Mani Khalko, a few days before her retirement made many appointments to the posts of Class III and Class IV employees without following the procedure of appointment stipulated by instruction dated 3.12.1980. No records were available in the office for such appointments, namely, advertisement, requisition to employment exchange, committee for preparing panel to be chaired by District Magistrate, with District Welfare Officer and three officers of different district levels. According to the respondent advertisement was issued for Class III and Class IV employees on 4.6.1993 and on 12.7.1993 interview letters were issued. According to the appellants all these were signed by Miss Suraj Mani Khalko and were fabricated and forged documents and were never issued by the department which is manifest from the dispatch register. On 16.9.1993 the appointment letter was purportedly issued and the resp























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