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

2011 Supreme(P&H) 327

M.M.KUMAR, RITU BAHRI
Bhupinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Vanita – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges order dated 51.2010 (P-2) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, the Tribunal^ and also seeks quashing of show cause notices dated 19.5.2010 (P-3) issued by the official respondents to the petitioners for termination of their services pursuant to the direction issued by the Tribunal.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 20.2.2006, the Director Principal, Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh, issued an advertisement for filling up 40 posts of Staff Nurses on regular basis out of which one post was reserved for the Schedule Caste Category. Thereafter in August 2006, another advertisement was issued by the Government of India for filling up 114 posts of Staff Nurses in the respondent-College out of which 9 posts were reserved for Scheduled Caste category. The petitioners as well as Ms. Vanita-respondent No. 1 applied for the said posts. It is pertinent to mention that Ms. Vanita belongs to reserved category of Scheduled Caste and she had been working as a Staff Nurse, on contract basis in the respondent- College. O





















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