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

1999 Supreme(Del) 490

B.K.RAMAMOORTHY
HAVILDAR SEDU RAM – Appellant
Versus
CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.AGARWAL, R.M.TIWARI

K. Ramamoorthy, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner on the date of the writ petition was working as Havildar and he is still on the same post. According to him, he was wrongly denied his promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar while his junior Subedar Mahender Singh, respondent No. 4, was promoted overlooking the claims of the petitioner on the basis of the adverse remark made by the third respondent, Col-Ravi Mohan, who wanted the fourth respondent to be promoted. The facts of this case lie in a very narrow compass.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was due for promotion w. e. f. 12. 11. 1994. He was superseded by his junior Hav. Om Prakash. The fourth respondent, Mahender Singh, was given promotion w. e. f. 1. 8. 1996 superseding the petitioner. According to the petitioner, for the purpose of getting promotion, a Havildar should have earned two above Average Grades and should be three above Averages and three high Averages in the gradings in the Annual Confidential Reports.

( 3 ) WHEN the petitioner s case was considered in 1996, for Five years from 1990 to 1995 the gradings of the petitioners are as under:-

( 4 ) IN the year 1995, the Initiating Officer, Cap. Adesh Yadav has graded the petitioner as











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