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

2018 Supreme(All) 632

PANKAJ MITHAL, SARAL SRIVASTAVA
AVINASH CHANDRA TRIPATHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Siddharth Khare, S.K. Chaubey and Ashok Khare for the Petitioner; C.S.C. and Manish Goyal for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Saral Srivastava, J.—Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S.K. Chaubey, Advocate for the petitioner and Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 3.5.2016 passed by the Special Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh whereby the petitioner has been granted compulsory retirement.

3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner was appointed as a member of U.P. Nyayik Seva on 13.4.1992. Consequent upon his appointment, the petitioner joined on the post of Munsif/Civil Judge (Junior Division). The petitioner was promoted as Civil Judge (Senior Division) on 10.10.2000. The petitioner was promoted to the Higher Judicial Service on 15.9.2010 and was posted as Additional District Judge at Azamgarh during the period 2012-13.

4. The Administrative Judge, Azamgarh wrote Annual Confidential Remarks (hereinafter referred to as “ACR”) for the year 2012-13 wherein he recorded that the complaints had been received rega




























































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