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

1995 Supreme(Pat) 180

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
Dhrub Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the petitioner:Mr. Ashok Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, S.C.I.

Judgment

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

The petitioners in this case have challenged the order contained in Memo No. 1165 dated 7th April 1992 (Annexure 5) by which the appointment of the petitioners have been cancelled on the ground of illegal appointment after about 12 years of their service.

2. The case of the petitioners resin a narrow compass as started hereunder:-

The respondent-State vide their resolution dated 15th of January 1979 laid down mode and procedure for appointment against class IV posts According to the aforeside reseintion Selection Committee at the district level were to make selection for appointment against Class IV post available in the district offices under the Excise prohibition Department of the State of Bihar. In the said year 1979 a number of posts of Excise and prohibition department in different offices vide latter dated 10th of October, 1979. Total 1267 posts were created. According to the petitioners notice was published by the deputy Commissioner Excise and Prohibition Darbhanga and Koshi division Begusarai in the year 1980 for filling up the Class IV posts of Excise Constables which where under his jurisdiction. Petitioners alongwith other applied for the s


















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