G. NARENDAR, NYAPATHY VIJAY
Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Praja Parishad, Eluru – Appellant
Versus
T. Seshagiri – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's demand for service regularization. (Para 4) |
| 2. petitioner's lawful appointment and entitlement. (Para 10) |
| 3. respondent's contention of miscarriage of justice. (Para 11) |
| 4. judicial scrutiny of government orders. (Para 12 , 22) |
| 5. supreme court interpretation of g.o. (Para 23) |
| 6. cut-off dates for regularization. (Para 24) |
| 7. abuse of judicial system and eligibility doubts. (Para 26 , 32) |
| 8. final order and remittal to single judge. (Para 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
G. Narendar, J.
Heard Sri G. Srinivasulu Reddy, Learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the Appellant; Sri S. Syam Sunder Rao, Learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/writ petitioner; and learned G P (S-IV) appearing for Respondents 2 and 3.
2. The Appellant is the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Praja Parishad, Eluru, West Godavari District, and is before this Court in this intra-Court Appeal being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge rendered in W.P.No.474 of 2021, dated 05.01.2023.
3. The parties are referred to in this Appeal by their nomenclature before the learned Single Judge for the sake of brevity and convenience.
4. It is the case of the Petitioner that his demand for reg
A. Manjula Bhashini v. A.P. Women’s Coop. Finance Corpn. Ltd.
Sushma Sharma v. State of Rajasthan
Prag Ice & Oil Mills v. Union of India
Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal
District Collector/Chairman v. M.L. Singh
Director General, Doordarshan v. Manas Dey
State of Haryana v. Piara Singh
Union of India v. Parameswaran Match Works
Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi(3)
Jacob M. Puthuparambil v. Kerala Water Authority
Gujarat Agricultural University v. Rathod Labhu Bechar
Council for Civil Services Union v. Minister of Civil Service
National Buildings Construction Corpn. v. S. Raghunathan
Chanchal Goyal (Dr.) v. State of Rajasthan
Rai Shivendra Bahadur (Dr.) v. Governing Body of the Nalanda College
State of Maharashtra v. Shashikant S. Pujari
Ramesh Chand v. State of Haryana
State of U.P. v. Vijay Kumar Mishra
M.J. Exporters (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
Sarguja Transport Service v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal
Regularization of services for daily wage employees requires strict adherence to eligibility criteria established by statutory rules; prolonged service without eligibility does not confer a right to ....
The court ruled that employees employed for lengthy periods cannot be denied regularization of service, emphasizing principles of fairness and equality under the Constitution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a workman's reinstatement under a tripartite settlement does not necessarily deprive the workman of the right to claim regularization, especia....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.