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

DELHI HIGH COURT
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Vijay Bhushan Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.

1. In matters of employment, the aspects of appointment, inter-se seniority and promotions are crucial. Time and again, issues relating to these aspects land in the Courts. The petitioner in this case has put up a case that he has been superseded by three of his juniors who were promoted to the rank of Senior Investigator out of turn, owing to the relaxation of certain rules by the department, first on ad-hoc basis and then on regular posts. Consequentially, the petitioner was also promoted. However, the respective dates of regularization of the petitioner and the three juniors had a gap of 4 years and aggrieved therewith, the petitioner has called upon the Court to regularize his services from a prior date.

Facts of the Case

2. The present case carries with it a long historical account. Let us briefly expound the same. On 21.12.1976, the petitioner joined as a Junior Investigator with the respondent. On 08.02.1977, three juniors of the petitioner namely, Sh. Suresh Kumar, Sh. R.S. Attri and Sh. K.L Goyal, who were already working as Junior Investigators on ad-hoc basis since 1973, 1974 and 1975 respectively, were regularized w.e.f. 04.11.1

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