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) 353

V.H.BHAIRAVIA
P. R. Prajapati – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: K.A.Mehta, R.A.MISHRA, R.M.DOSHIT

V. H. BHAIRAVIA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, in this petition under Art 226 of the Constitution of India, have prayed for a writ of madamus directing respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners in the cadre of Tracers, since they have been selected by the panchayat Selection committee and got appointed.

( 2 ) THE short facts leading to the present petition are that the petitioners are qualified candidates for the post of Tracer and therefore therie names were sent by the Employment exchange to the District Development Officer, Sabarkantha District Panchayat and in response thereto, the petitioners were called for interview by the respondent no. 3. Thereafter written test was also conducted by the respondent no. 3. The petitioners appeared in the said interview and test and after successfully getting through the said examination, the petitioners were further called for oral interview. In oral interview also, the petitoners on getting success, were selected for the post of Tracer by the Panchayat selection committee, consisting of District Development Officer and other officers. Thereafter, selected candidates were appointed as Tracers by the order of the responent no. 3








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