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

2012 Supreme(P&H) 730

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA
State of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Suraj Mal – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants: Ms. Tanisha Peshawaria, D.A.G., Haryana.
For the Respondent:Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.: - Plaintiff Suraj Mal instituted a suit praying for a decree of declaration to the effect that the order dated 25.8.1999 as also order dated 14.9.1999, whereby he had been ordered to be compulsorily retired and having been adjusted against a post carrying a lower pay scale were illegal and void and the plaintiff be held entitled to be reinstated on a post carrying equal status and scale and he be also held entitled to all consequential benefits with interest @ 12% per annum. Plaintiff pleaded that he was employed as a Driver on regular basis in the Transport Department, Govt. of Haryana and posted at Jind Depot, Haryana Roadways. After having served for almost 23 years he was retired compulsorily vide order dated 25.8.1999 on the ground that he had suffered 30% disability in vision. He was consequently adjusted in terms of offering an appointment on the post of Chowkidar in a lower pay scale vide order dated 14.9.1999. Against such backdrop the suit had been filed.

2. The Trial Court dismissed the suit vide judgement dated 21.2.2006 on the premises that the plaintiff himself had submitted a written consent and accordingly had accepted the al


















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