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

1995 Supreme(Kar) 551

M.F.SALDANHA
SWAMY B. N. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


M. F. SALDANHA, J.

( 1 ) THESE group of petitions relates to the year 1992 and 1993. In fact, despite the fact that the subject-matter of these petitions is something like eight years old, the earlier orders passed by this Court will indicate that the grievance of the entire set of petitioners who are Law Officers of the B. D. A. was to the effect that they are kept in a state of uncertainty insofar as no regulations had been framed as far as their employment is concerned and that therefore, they were highly prejudiced. The added circumstances to my mind which also requires to be taken into account is the fact that the petitioners are all performing various legal functions and are effectively advocates which is a matter which this Court requires to take special cognizance of. Pursuant to the earlier orders passed, the Government finally approved the regulations and the basic grievance therefore is redressed. At that stage one further difficulty emerged which 1 shall briefly summarize. In the entire group of petitions that are before me, there are in all 23 persons who have been appointed at different points of time. The Government in all has sanctioned 10 posts and therefore as fa













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