Rajneesh Bansal vs State of Haryana - 2022 Supreme(P&H) 1455

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1455

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Rajneesh Bansal – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Puneet Jindal, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Navroop Jawanda, Advocate, and Mr. Sandeep Bansal, Advocate, and Mr. Anubhav Bansal, Advocate, Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Abhinav Aggarwal, Advocate, Mr. Puneet Bali, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. J.S.Yadav, Advocate, and Mr. Nihit, Advocate, Mr. Salil Sagar, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Sankalp Sagar, Advocate, Mr. O.P.Goyal, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Amar Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate, and Mr. Parul Aggarwal, Advocate, and Ms. Deepika Sood, Advocate, and Mr. Pritish Goel, Advocate, Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Sumeet Goel, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Munish Behl, Advocate, and Mr. Aarush Neeraj Vaid, Advocate, Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G. Haryana, Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Ranjit Singh Kalra, Advocate, Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Sumeet Goel, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, and Mr. Arjun Shukla, Advocate, and Ms. Shelly Arora, Advocate, Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate, and Mr. Kshitiz Goel, Advocate, Mr. Amit Agrawal, Advocate, and Ms. Radhika Yadav, Advocate, and Mr. Himanshu Arora, Advocate, Mr. Arnav Udai Singh, Advocate, for, Mr. Sunil K. Nehra, Advocate, Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Teevar Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Anmol Dutt Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Rubina Vermani, Advocate, Mr. Gurinder Pal, Singh, Advocate, for the Respondent.

Table of Content
1. challenge to seniority lists (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. legal basis for claims of promotees (Para 4 , 14 , 15)
3. details of appointment processes (Para 5 , 6 , 10)
4. fast track judges and their claims (Para 12 , 13)
5. rules affecting appointment and seniority (Para 16 , 18 , 21)
6. court’s observations on legal arguments (Para 24 , 26 , 30)
7. determining seniority based on rules (Para 36 , 37 , 39 , 41 , 42)
8. final conclusion on dismissal of writ petitions (Para 50 , 51)

JUDGMENT

Augustine George Masih, J. - In this bunch of writ petitions, challenge is to the Minutes of the Meeting of the Sub-Committee dated 12.04.2008 constituted for determining the seniority amongst the Judges appointed from different sources direct recruits, promotees (accelerated) on the basis of having passed the departmental competitive examination, the promotees, as such, on the basis of seniority-cum-merit and the Fast Track Court, who have been absorbed in service and as a consequence thereof, the tentative seniority list dated 15.01.2013 and the final seniority list dated 22.10.2013 as issued by the High Court.

Challenge has been posed by the Fast Track Court Judges, who have been kept at the ta

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1455

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, SANDEEP MOUDGILRajneesh Bansal – AppellantVersusState of Haryana – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Rajneesh Bansal – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent