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

2009 Supreme(SC) 1234

K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, P. SATHASIVAM, B. S. CHAUHAN
MALIK MAZHAR SULTAN – Appellant
Versus
UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION – Respondent


ORDER

IA No. 59

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not pressing this application. Hence, dismissed as not pressed, without prejudice to the special leave petitions filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

SLPs (C) Nos. 28488, 27978, 29248 of 2008 and SLP (C) No. ... CCs Nos. 14852-54 of 2008

2. Delink and post separately on 28-8-2008.

IA No. 63

3. This application has been filed by 18 Civil Judges (Junior Division) in the cadre of Andhra Pradesh State Subordinate Judicial Service. They were denied promotion to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division).

4. The main contention urged by the applicants is that all the Civil Judges (Junior Division) who were in the zone of consideration for promotion to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) were subjected to oral interview and based on the marks secured in the interview, promotions were given and 33 candidates, including the present applicants, were denied promotion.

5. The High Court has filed a counter-affidavit/reply stating that they followed the guidelines issued by this Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) v. U.P. Public Service Commission passed on 4-1-2007. As regards the promotion to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Div



















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