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

2001 Supreme(Pat) 839

NARAYAN ROY
Binay Kumar Singh And Another – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

Narayan Roy, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of order, as contained in Memo No. 781 dated 12-6-2000, whereby and whereunder petitioner No. 1 has been terminated as also direction has been given for recovery of the amount paid to him, and the order, as contained in Memo No. 789 dated 12-6-2000, whereby and whereunder petitioner No. 2 has been terminated and direction have been given for recovery of the amount paid to him.

2. It is submitted by learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioner No. 1 appointed as Clerk and petitioner No. 2 was appointed as Peon on the basis of the recommendations of the Divisional Establishment Committee and names were called for from the Employment Exchange and on the basis thereof, the petitioners applied and they were interviewed and were finally selected by the Divisional Establishment Committee and, accordingly, they were appointed to the aforesaid posts. It is further submitted that at one point of time, the matter was scrutinised by the Director, Secondary Education at the stage when the salary of the petitioners were stopped and the Dir







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