Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE
Munna Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
Damodar Valley Corporation – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners allege discrimination in dvc appointments. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. dvc contests claims of suppressed facts. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. petitioner argues similarity with previous appointees. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 4. court observes lack of necessary pleadings. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. material facts of appointment history discussed. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. legal stand against stale claims reiterated. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. writ petition dismissed with no costs. (Para 32) |
Judgment :
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.
Preface
1. Two employees of the Damodar Valley Corporation (for short, “DVC”) have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon‟ble Court through the present writ petition, alleging hostile discrimination and unequal treatment in respect of appointment to the post of Dozer Operator Grade-III, as well as in the grant of service-related benefits, including promotion and other consequential benefits. They further claim to be similarly situated as three other employees, namely Gopal Roy, Sahin Aktar, and Trilochan Singh, and seek the grant of such service- related benefits with effect from the date on which Gopal Roy and the other two employees were so granted.
2. Duri
Belated claims for service benefits not entertained if they unsettle settled positions in service law; petitioners must demonstrate similarity of standing to succeed.
No indefeasible right to appointment from provisional selection where vacancies reduced to nil due to restructuring; belated challenge after knowing revised vacancies barred by limitation and estoppe....
Unsuccessful candidates participating in selection process without protest cannot challenge criteria or outcome later under approbation-reprobation doctrine; experience must strictly relate to applie....
Employment and Service matter - Grade-IV employees - Selection process - Selection process is not subject matter of challenge in absence of any grounds, subsequent action of issuing appointment order....
The court established that arbitrary denial of service recognition violates the principles of fairness and justice under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The court affirmed the principle of providing alternative employment to medically unfit candidates, emphasizing timely action and adherence to judicial discipline.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
