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

1996 Supreme(Bom) 134

R.K.BATTA, P.S.PATANKAR
Sudin M. Sangodcar – Appellant
Versus
State of Goa, through the Chief Secretary and another – Respondent


JUDGMENT- P.S. PATANKAR, J.---All these three writ petitions can be disposed of by this common judgment as the facts involved are same and also the points.

2.In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India three questions arise for our consideration :---(i) Whether Rule 17 of the Goa Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the Rules of 1992) provides for two separate modes of recruitment or whether direct recruitment under Rule 17(b) is to be resorted to only after exhausting the avenue of promotion contemplated under Rule 17(a); (ii) Whether Rules 17(a) and 17(b) provide for quota i.e. 67% by promotion and 33% by direct the recruitment; and (iii) What is the meaning of 'post' contained in Rule 17(b)?

3.For the sake of convenience we shall give the averments made in one petition being Writ Petition No. 4 of 1996 and the affidavits filed on behalf of respondents.

4.The petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge, Junior Division under Order dated 18-10-1991. The Goa, Daman and Diu Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules of 1985 came to be superseded by the 1992 Rules. In the cadre of Civil Judge, S.D. there were 9 posts prior to 1993. Seven p










































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