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

2005 Supreme(SC) 165

RUMA PAL, C.K.THAKKER
STATE OF U. P. – Appellant
Versus
VINOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The question involved in this appeal is whether the interest is payable on arrears of salary to which the respondent became entitled by being retrospectively promoted. The Food and Civil Supplies Department, the Department concerned of the appellant, was the respondent in several writ petitions filed by its employees with regard to their respective claims for promotion. Diverse orders were passed on these writ petitions. All matters ultimately came up before this Court when this Court on 7-1-1997 set aside all the orders passed by the various Benches of the High Court and directed that fresh promotions should be made with retrospective effect according to the State-level seniority list submitted to this Court. In respect of those who have been promoted prior to 1-1-1985, it was directed that if they were promoted by the V.P. Regularisation of Ad hoc Promotions (on Posts within the Purview of PSC) Rules, 1988, they were not to be disturbed. This Court also went on to say that those promoted with retrospective effect would be entitled to all pecuniary benefits on such promotion.

3. According to the seniority list which was the subject-matter of scrutiny by thi









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