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

2025 Supreme(All) 3540

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
J.J.MUNIR
Gobinddas – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Anand Kumar Pandey, Kamini Pandey (Dubey)

JUDGMENT :

J.J. MUNIR, J.

1. The two petitioners here are Safaikarmi/Sweepers, who say that they are holding the post of a Safaikarmi on a temporary basis in the establishment of the Uttar Pradesh Police at Lalitpur. The first petitioner, Gobinddas, claims to be working as a temporary hand with Police Station Madanpur, District Lalitpur, whereas the second petitioner, Kaushla, says that he is similarly working with Police Station Barrar Narahat, District Lalitpur. Both the petitioners say that they are working as Safaikarmi with their respective police stations on a temporary basis. They receive for their services an honorarium of Rs.1200/- per month from the State Government.

2. The petitioners claim that they are employed as temporary hands since July, 2022, but no appointment letters have been issued in their favour by the respondents. It is added, however, that the Station House Officers of the two police stations have issued a certificate in favour of the two petitioners, acknowledging their respective services. It is also the petitioners' case that they are regularly working at Police Stations Madanpur and Barrar Narahat, performing their duties in two shifts, viz. 7.00 a.m. to

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