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

2000 Supreme(All) 1374

S.RAFAT ALAM
SANTOSH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA – Appellant
Versus
MANAGING DIRECTOR, U. P. RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.M.L.Hajela, S.M.A.Kazmi, SUNIT KUMAR, U.N.Sharma

S. RAFAT ALAM, J.

( 1 ) THESE are petitions under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for initiating contempt proceeding against the respondents for the alleged defiance of Division Bench judgment and order dated 24-5-1996 of this Court in Special Appeal No. 384 of 1993 and Writ Petition No. 16816 of 1993. Both the contempt petitions arise out of the common judgment and, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.

( 2 ) HEARD Sri K. M. L. Hajela assisted by Sri S. M. A. Kazmi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sunit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

( 3 ) THE short fact of the case giving rise to the contempt petition is that U. P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam advertised 70 posts of Sub Engineers (Civil) in the year 1988 inviting applications for appointment. The vacancy was subsequently increaesd from 70 to 146. The petitioners were diploma holders in civil engineering and being eligible applied in the prescribed proforma for selection and appointment. They also appeared in the written test as well as interview conducted in the year 1989. However, when their results were not declared, the petitioner, Santosh Kumar Srivas

















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