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

1994 Supreme(Raj) 437

M.N.VENKATACHALIAH, S.MOHAN
State of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Shri Umrao Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Aruneshwar Gupta, Advocate for the Appellant Sushil Kumar Jain, Advocate for the Respondent

Honble MOHAN, J. — Leave granted.

(2). The facts lie in a narrow compass.

(3). The respondents father died while he was serving as a Sub- Inspector, C.I.D. (Special Branch) in the year 1988. The respondent applied to the appellant for appointment on compassionate ground. He was appointed as Lower Division Clerk on 14.12.1989 on compassionate ground. After having accepted the appointment as L.D.C., he sought appointment as Sub-Inspector. That was denied. Aggrieved by the denial, he preferred S.B.C. W.P. No. 3875 of 1992. By judgment dated 6.8.1992 the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Rajasthan directed consideration of his candidature for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector in accordance with the proviso to Rule 5 of Rajasthan Recruitment of Dependants of the Government Servants (Dying while in Service) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) The consideration was directed to be effected within six months from the date of the judgment. Assailing the correctness of this judgment, Special Appeal No. 431 of 1993 was filed by the appellant. That was dismissed on the ground of delay of 112 days. Thus, the present civil appeal.

(4). Two alternate contentions are rais











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