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

2011 Supreme(All) 2755

RAJES KUMAR
HIRA LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
J.H. Khan and Gulrez Khan for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Rajes Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Gulrez Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Suman Sirohi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to pay pension, gratuity, provident fund and other retiral dues to the petitioner alongwith 18% interest.

3. By the amendment application, the petitioner has further prayed for mandamus to treat him as a regular employee from 4.8.1999 or at least from 28.11.2004 and in the nature of mandamus declaring Regulation 370 (ii) of the Civil Services Regulation to be ultra vires as being hit by Articles 14, 19 and 31(1) of the Constitution of India.

4. The brief facts of the case, stated in the writ petition, are that initially the petitioner was engaged by oral order as Beldar in the Department of respondent No. 2 in the year 1987 and after continuously serving three years he was issued appointment letter on 1.1.1990 appointing him temporarily for the period 1.1.1990 to 28.2.1990. In the appointment letter, it was clearly stipulated that the services of the petitioner shall be terminated after the expiry of aforesaid period without any
































































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