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

2018 Supreme(All) 1024

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, RANG NATH PANDEY
SYED FAZAL MOHAMMAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Y.S. Lohit for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—Heard Sri Y.S. Lohit, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents.

2. Under challenge in this writ petition is an order dated 4.9.2014 passed by the State Government whereby the claim of the petitioner for his promotion to the post of Joint Director with effect from 7.8.1999 in the Department of Local Funds and Audit of the State of U.P., has been rejected.

3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner in respect of his claim is that the respondents have clearly erred in law and have, in fact, acted contemptuously in as much as while rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the post of Joint Director, they have not followed the judgment and order dated 6.7.2001 rendered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 6586 (SS) of 1983, which was filed by the petitioner with the prayers inter alia for re-fixation of his seniority and other consequential benefits. It has further been pointed out by learned Counsel for the petitioner that case of the petitioner for promotion to the post in




































































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