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

1998 Supreme(All) 1007

M.KATJU
MOHD. ISLAM SIDDIQUI AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHAND OTHERS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ashok Khare

M. KATJU, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Sri Ashok Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sunil Ambwani appearing for the High Court and for the District Judge, Mainpuri.

( 2 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for a mandamus directing the respondents to declare the result of the selection held on 24. 3. 1995 for the post of Hindi Stenographer in the District Judgeship of mainpuri. It appears that the District Judge, Mainpuri Issued an advertisement which was published in the newspapers inviting applications for filling up the post of Hindi Stenographers in the Judgeship of Mainpuri. On 24. 3. 1995 the selection test for Hindi Stenographer was conducted and the petitioners participated in the same. However, it appears that the result of this selection was not declared by the District Judge, Mainpuri. In paragraph 7 of the writ petition, it is stated that the reason for not declaring the result was that on 23. 3. 1995 some circular letter from the High Court was received by the District Judge placing some restraint on the District judge. As yet the process of the selection held on 24. 3. 1995 has not been complete. Aggrieved this petition has been filed.


( 3 ) A counter-affidavit has bee














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