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

1999 Supreme(Ker) 383

C.S.RAJAN
Mary George – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Judgment :-

C.S. Rajan, J.

The petitioners who were qualified to be appointed as Lower Primary School Assistants (LPS as) were appointed in various leave vacancies by the 7th respondent in his school. The first petitioner was appointed on various dates as per Ext. P1, P2 and P3 orders. The above appointment was not approved by the 5th respondent as per Ext. P5 order. The appointment of the first petitioner as per Exts. P2 and P3 were rejected by the 6th respondent as per Ext. P6 and P7 orders. Ext. P8 is the order in appeal by the 4th respondent which confirmed Ext. P6.

2. The 2nd petitioner was appointed as per Ext. P9 order. The above appointment was not approved by the 6th respondent as per Ext. P10 order. Ext. P11 is the order in appeal by the 4th respondent, which confirmed Ext. P10. The revision filed by the 2nd petitioner against Ext. P11 was rejected by the 2nd respondent as per Ext. P12. The appointment of the 3rd petitioner as per Ext. P13 order was rejected by not granting approval by the 3rd respondent as per Ext. P14. Appeal filed against Ext. P14 was rejected as per Ext. P5 along with the appeal filed by the 1st petitioner.

3. Ext. P15 is the appointment order of the 4th












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