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

1993 Supreme(Guj) 280

R.D.VYAS, S.D.SHAH
A. C. SHAH – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.P.TANNA, H.K.RATHOD, J.A.ADESHARA, R.C.Jani, REKHA DOSHIT

SHAH, J.

( 1 ) A perennial dispute of inequality of opportunity in the matter of promotion to the post of Deputy Engineer in the Electrical engineering Branch of Public Works Department of the State of gujarat between Junior Engineers (Degree Holders) and Supervisors (Diploma. Holders) was brought to the Court as back as 1975 and the following directions issued by the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 1749 of 1980 has revived this petition for our decision. By judgment and order dated 1 6/03/1993 (reported in 1993 (2) GLR 1304, State v. A. C. Shah), the supreme Court observed as under (at page No. 1306 para 4) :"we stand deprived of the pleadings of the parties before the High Court. The pleadings now introduced do not help us. Significantly, the High Court judgment is silent as to the basis en which it was persuaded to strike down of 2 : 1 for junior Engineers and Supervisors respectively. The tenor of the judgment of the high Court does however suggest that the executive flexibility, with which the government works could not justify the fixation of the ratio of 2 :1. The High court could not and did not substitute what was the right ratio in the circumstances and left it



























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