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

1991 Supreme(Raj) 44

M.R.CALLA
Mangal Chand Taylor – Appellant
Versus
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L. Samdaria for petitioner R.M. Lodha for respondents.

M.R. CALLA, J.—This writ petition is directed against the order Ex. 3, dt. 1/9/1989 whereby the adverse remarks in the ACR for the year 1982 were conveyed to the petitioner and the order dated 27th January 1990, Ex. 5, whereby the petitioners representation dated 11/9/1989 against adverse remarks was rejected.

2. The petitioner in this case is a member of Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service and his case is that he was appointed to the Rajasthan Judicial Service on 1.06.1971 and was promoted as Civil Judge and then as Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and was further promoted as Additional District & Sessions Judge in the cadre of RHJS vide order dated 11.08.1987. By a communication dated 1.09.1989 Ex. 3, the petitioner was informed that while assessing his work for the year 1982, it was observed in his Annual Confidential Report as under—

"You write judgments ordinarily & not laboured judgments. You never bother yourself in the matters of keeping control over the office, administrative capacity and tact. You cannot be depended upon for jobs assigned to you."

3. Against these observations, the petitioner submitted a representation, Ex. 4, dated 11.09.1989 and the same was rejected as












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