Back
RAJNESH OSWAL, PUNEET GUPTA
Shoket Mahmood Chowdhary – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K – Respondent
JUDGEMENT
Rajnesh Oswal, J.
1. The appellant has filed five intra court appeals against the judgment dated 31.03.2018 whereby the learned writ court disposed of three writ petitions i.e. SWP No. 1613/2013, SWP No. 1820/2013 and SWP No. D-1071/2014 filed by the private respondent and two writ petitions i.e. SWP No. 1216/2015 and SWP No. 1933/2016 filed by the appellant.
2. The Letters Patent Appeal bearing No. 56/2018 arises out of the writ petition bearing SWP No. 1820/2013 filed by the private respondent for quashing the order No. 367-HME of 2013, dated 26.06.2013, whereby the appellant was deemed to be appointed as Lecturer in the discipline of Medicine, Government Medical College (GMC), Jammu notionally with effect from 04.07.2007 (the date of notification by the Public Service Commission) and further he was placed below Dr. Anil Dhar, Lecturer, Medicine, GMC, Jammu and above Dr. Faiz Ahmed Wani, Lecturer Medicine, GMC, Jammu.
3. The Letters Patent Appeal bearing No. 52/2018 arises out of the writ petition bearing SWP No. 1613/2013 filed by the private respondent wherein he sought quashing of the order bearing No. 415-HME of 2013, dated 22.07.2013, whereby the appellant was placed a
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellant was not entitled to antedated appointment, and the principle of res judicata did not apply to the subsequent writ petitions file....
The court upheld the validity of appointments made under the reservation policy, emphasizing that challenges to such appointments after a significant delay are barred by principles of delay and lache....
The court upheld the validity of appointments made under the reservation policy, emphasizing that claims regarding seniority must be raised timely and that errors in selection processes should not pe....
Seniority fixed from date of first appointment per service rules, not retrospectively from interview; pay protection allowed from prior employment to prevent discrimination against delayed appointee.
Law cannot come to the rescue of the official respondents in having extended a benefit in favour of certain employees in disregard of rules and the law on the subject. The Court cannot be a signatory....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
