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

1993 Supreme(Guj) 235

K.J.VAIDYA
C. D. Chokshi – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: I.S.SUPEHIA, T.H.Sompura

K. J. VAIDYA, J.

( 1 ) WHETHER a Government servant holding a particular post quite on ad-hoc and temporary basis could be compulsorily retired under clause (aa) (l) (A) of Rule 161 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959? This, in short is the question arising for determination in this writ petition.

( 2 ) FEW relevant facts which are not in dispute are- The petitioner C. D. Choksi, b. E. (Civil) was appointed as an Overseer (Class-III) by an order dated 5-5-1961. Thereafter he was promoted to the higher posts and ultimately promoted to the post of executive Engineer on ad-hoc and temporary basis by an order dated 18-10-1985. Thereafter the petitioner by an order dated 30-7-1988 (Annexure-Q) was compulsorily retired at once in the interest of public service. It is this order of compulsory retirement, which has given rise to the present petition.

( 3 ) MR. I. S. Supehia, the learned advocate for the petitioner while challenging the impugned order has raised several contentions in the memo of petition, however, at the time of final hearing, he has pressed into service only one contention, which according to him, goes to the root of the matter as the same is directly covered by the






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