BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
Naw Raj Bhattarai – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.
1. As both W.P. (C) No 29 of 2017 and W.P. (C) No. 30 of 2017 raises similar issues this common judgment shall dispose both of them.
2. Heard the petitioners in person in both the writ petitions; Dr. Doma T. Bhutia, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 in W.P. (C) No 29 of 2017 and respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 in W.P. (C) No. 30 of 2017 and Mr. D.K. Siwakoti, learned counsel for respondent no.4 in W.P. (C) No 29 of 2017 and respondent no.5 in W.P.(C) No. 30 of 2017.
3. The petitioners in person (Naw Raj Bhattarai) in W.P. (C) No. 29 of 2017 and (Amosh Shanker) in W.P. (C) No. 30 of 2017) submits that although their appointment orders state that they had been appointed on contractual basis, the Advanced Technical Training Centre (ATTC) had always treated them as regular employees and its failure to regularise them in spite of various assurances violates their fundamental rights. It is also their case that the ATTC has failed to keep the student faculty ratio as per the requirements set by the All India Counsel for Technical Education (AICTE) and on that ground also a direction to regularise them would be maintainabl
Union Public Service Commission v. Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela & Ors. 2006 (2) SCALE 115;
B.S. Minhas v. Indian Statistical Institute & Ors. AIR 1984 SC 363;
Mani Subrat Jain & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. Anita & Anr. (2016) 8 SCC 293
Umadevi (3) (supra); Union of India v. Arulmozhi Iniarasu
State of Madhyapradesh v. Mohd. Abrahim
Sethi Auto Service Stations v. DDA
State of Punjab v. Jagdip Singh [(1964) 4 SCR 964 : AIR 1964 SC 521]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.