SATYEN VAIDYA
Lekh Raj Son Of Late Sh. Shyam Lal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Himachal Pradesh, Through Secretary (Home) To The Government Of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla – Respondent
JUDGEMENT :
All these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment as identical questions of facts and law are involved.
2. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of these petitions are that all the petitioners are employees of police department of the State. They belong to ministerial staff and were initially engaged as Clerks. In the context of matter in issue, it will suffice to notice the posts respectively held by the petitioners as on 01.01.1996. Petitioners in CWPOA No. 4777 of 2019 and CWPOA No. 4737 of 2019 were holding posts of Clerks as on 01.01.1996, whereas petitioners in CWPOA Nos. 4691 and 4918 of 2019 were holding posts of Senior Clerks as on the said date.
3. Respondents State had notified Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Clerk (ClassIII Non-Gazetted) in the department of police on 14.02.1997. In the cadre of Clerks, three separate categories were carved. First being in the payscale of 9501800 (basic entry scale with initial start of Rs.1000/) for Clerks, second being in the payscale of Rs.12002130 for Seni
Roshan Lal Tandon v. Union of India (1968) 1 SCR 185
B.S. Vadera v. Union of India (1968) 3 SCR 575
State of Gujarat v. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni (1983) 2 SCC 33
K.C. Arora v. State of Haryana (1984) 3 SCC 281
K. Nagaraj v. State of A.P. (1985) 1 SCC 523
P.D. Aggarwal v. State of U.P. (1987) 3 SCC 622
K.Narayanan v. State of Karnataka 1994 Supp1 SCC 44
Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited & Anr. vs. Brojo Nath Ganguly & Anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.