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

2009 Supreme(All) 2769

ARUN TANDON
ASHISH SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
B.B. Paul and A.P. Paul for the Petitioner; S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Sri B.B. Paul, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri A.P. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

2. In paragraph-4 of the writ petition it has been stated that the father of the petitioner, who was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Junior High School, Madrakh, Block Lodha, District Aligarh had expired as early as on 8th May, 1989 due to harness.

3. After 20 years of the death of the bread earner, petitioner has approached this Court by means of present petition for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the application for compassionate appointment.

4. In support of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the Judgments of this Court in the case of Pushpendra Singh v. Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C. Aligarh and another, 2000 (1) ESC 448 (All) and Lalitesh Chandra Pathak v. Special Secretary, Government of U.P. and others, 2005 All CJ 2092.

5. I am of the considered opinion that compassionate appointments are offered to mitigate against the immediate uncalled for hardship, faced by the family members/dependants because of the death of the br

















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