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

2003 Supreme(AP) 1117

G.BIKSHAPATHY, GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
Kona Srinivas – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

( 1 ) THE multi pronged litigation is veering round the selections for appointment to the posts of multipurpose Health Assistants (Males ). It started with filing of O. A. No. 6856 of 2002 before the Tribunal by seven candidates challenging the notification issued by the official respondents dated 20. 7. 2002 published in various news papers prescribing basic qualifications S. S. C. with M. P. H. A. (M) training Course as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to G. O. Ms. No. 273, dated: 24. 4. 1989 issued under proviso to Article 309 constitution of India and for consequential direction to appoint the applicants to the post of M. P. H. A. (M) in Nalgonda District in accordance with the statutory rules. They also sought alternative prayer to declare the candidates, who obtained the M. P. H. A. one-year training certificate with S. S. C. qualification from the Institute of Public health, New Delhi after cut of date 2. 2. 2003 were not eligible for being considered for the post. However, the litigation swelled enormously due to various intervening factors leading to cancellation of notification itself. In respect of private institutions, the government sought to cance




























































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