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

1996 Supreme(Del) 952

JASPAL SINGH
DELHI ADMINISTRATION – Appellant
Versus
YOGENDRA SINGH – Respondent


Jaspal Singh,j.

( 1 ) THE facts giving rise to this writ petition need to be recapitulated in some detail.

( 2 ) IT appears that in December 1983 since there were posts of Horticulture Assistants/plant Protection Assistants, the Employment Exchange was asked to sponsor names, consequent upon which the names of the respondents were forwarded. They were selected on July 17, 1984 and all of them joined between August 1, 1984 and August 9, 1984. The appointments, however, were as daily paid workers. They continued to so work till the year 1987 when the Department took the decision to appoint them on adhoc basis till regular appointments were made. This appointment on adhoc basis was upto February 28, 1989. Much before the said date, the respondents had made representations for being treated as regular/permanent employees from the date of their joining service. However, since the representations were found unpalatable, they gave birth to dispute regarding their regularisation and by order dated January 12, 1987 the Delhi Administration referred the same to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The terms of reference were as under:

"whether the non-regularisation of S/shri Yoginder Si














































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