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

2015 Supreme(Raj) 672

AJIT SINGH, NIRMALJIT KAUR
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Manoj Kumar Sharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Manoj Bhandari, for Petitioners;
Kuldeep Mathur, for Respondents.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble KAUR, J.— Both the writ petitions are being disposed of by the common order as the impugned order is same.

2. The present writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 16th April, 2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal vide which both the above Original Applications were allowed and the Annexure-A/1 by which the entire process of examination was cancelled stood quashed with a direction to the respondent department to act further upon the selection process.

3. A notification came to be issued for organizing a selection to the post of Junior Engineer-II (Signal) Pay Band of 9300-34800 + 4200 Grade Pay against 20% intermediate apprentice quota. The applications were invited vide notification dated 6th Sept., 2010 from eligible candidates against three available vacancies in the aforesaid quota. Both the respondents namely Manoj Kumar Sharma and Rajendra Kumar Meena submitted their applications to the aforesaid notification. Both of them appeared for the written examination and qualified the same for paper screening for selection to the post of Junior Engineer-II (Signal). A provisional panel of 3 candidates only for the post of Junior E

























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