Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Sumitra – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
Plaintiff has filed the present appeal under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918. Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment dated 06.08.1993 vide which the 1st Appellate Court had set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 22.09.1990 and had allowed the appeal filed by the respondents No.1 and 2/defendants No.1 and 2 and had dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT
2. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial Court had rightly decreed the suit of the plaintiff, inasmuch as, in the eligibility terms and conditions, as detailed in Ex.P3, it was clearly mentioned that the women were eligible for being appointed as Casual Khallasi/Peon on the scale pay of Rs.35/- per day (on daily rated basis). It is further submitted that it had been rightly noticed by the trial Court that the Employment Exchange had recommended the names of 49 candidates to be selected, which included the plaintiff also and after the interview, only 43 candidates were selected and the plaintiff was rejected on the ground that she is a lady. It is submitted that the said ground of rejection wa
The exclusion of married daughters from compassionate appointment eligibility is unconstitutional, violating Article 14, as it lacks rational justification regarding financial dependency.
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
