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

1997 Supreme(All) 1243

S.P.SRIVASTAVA
ANIL KUMAR KAUSHIK – Appellant
Versus
NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Akhleshwar Singh, U.S.Awasthi, W.H.Khan

S. P. SRIVASTAVA, J.


( 1 ) FEELING aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent authority in the matter relating to the determination of" the claim of the petitioner regarding the regularisation of his services and his absorption against the vacant post of Junior Assistant/typist, he has approached this Court seeking redress praying for a direction requiring the respondent appointing authority to regularise his services.

( 2 ) THE parties have exchanged their affidavits. The learned Counsel for the parties have jointly requested that this writ petition be disposed of finally at this stage.

( 3 ) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances brought on record I find that the present case is fit one for being disposed of finally at this stage under the second proviso to Rule 2 (i) of Chapter 22 of the Rules of the Court.

( 4 ) I have heard Shri W. H. Khan learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri U. S. Awasthi learned counsel representing the respondents and have carefully perused the record.

( 5 ) ON 23. 5. 97 learned Counsel representing the respondent had stated that the service regulations providing the service conditions regulating the recruitment procedure for filing up of the post

























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