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

2003 Supreme(Pat) 977

NARAYAN ROY
Sitendra Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

Narayan Roy, J.

1. Heard respective Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned Government Pleader No. 1 and learned Standing Counsel No. 1 for the State.

2. All these writ applications have been filed for common cause, as the petitioners have been terminated from their services after serving under the respondents for more than a decade.

3. The facts involved in all these cases are identical, therefore, individual case are not required to be scrutinised separately, and, accordingly, these writ applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this order.

4. According to the cases of the petitioners, some of them were appointed directly on Class III posts and Class IV posts and some of them were regularised from daily wages to Class IV posts. The majority of the petitioners continued in services for more than 10 years on regular basis, their service books etc. were opened and they were made permanent and some of them were granted time bound promotions. Many of the petitioners are said to have continued to services even for about 20 years. There are case, where the petitioners appointments were doubted by the authorities and inquiries were held



























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