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

1969 Supreme(Bom) 3

D.B.PADHYE, J.R.VIMULDALAL
SHANKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent


JUDGMENT

PADHYE J.-Original petitioners in this petition were two: (1) Shankar Jayaram Ambardekar in his individual capacity and (2) Nagpur District Pensioners Association, Nagpur, through its Honorary Secretary Mr. R. N. Gadrc. After the petition was admitted the petitioners were required to give the names of the pensioners of the petitioner No. 2 Association who had retired prior to 1.11-1956, but in spite of several opportunities being given, no names were supplied and the orders passed by this Court from time to time were not complied with. We are, therefore, not required to consider in this petition the case of those pensioners said to have been represented by the petitioner No.2 and the decision of this case will be confined only so far as the petitioner No.1 Shankar Jayara.m Ambardekar is concerned.

2. The petitioner No. 1 in the original petition will hereinafter be described as the petitioner only. The petitioner was employed in the year 1912 as an Overseer in the Agricultural Department as a probationer in the then Central Provinces. He was then transferred as probationer to Hoshangabad and thereafter to Seoni as an Agricultural Assistant and was confirmed as an Agricultu




















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