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

2010 Supreme(All) 3045

K.N.PANDEY, SUNIL AMBWANI
NEERAJ SHUKLA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
G.K. Singh for the Petitioners; Pankaj Saxena, S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—We have heard Shri G.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Pankaj Saxena, learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.

2. All the five petitioners are Bachelors in Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery. They do not belong to any reserved category. All of them are working as Medical Officers (Ayurvedic/ Unani) Community Health on contract basis since April, 2005. By this writ petition they have prayed for quashing the Advertisement No. 4/2009-10 issued by the U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad published in ‘Dainik Jagran’ on 2nd October, 2009, inviting application for selections on 137 posts of Medical Officers, Community Health (Ayurvedic/ Unani). Dr. Neeraj Kumar Shukla is co-petitioner with Dr. Vivek Kumar Singh in Writ Petition No. 1694 (S/B) of 2008 in which an interim order was made on 24.11.2008, permitting them to work on contract basis until regular selections. This fact has been placed before the Court by the Standing Counsel and is stated in paras 13 and 16 of the counter-affidavit of Dr. Jaishanker Shukla filed on behalf of the State respondents.

3. The Advertisement No. 4 of 2009-10 issued by the Commission inviting applicat













































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