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

AKIL ABDUL HAMID KURESHI, ARINDAM LODH
Yoginder Pal – Appellant
Versus
High Court of Tripura – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Prashant Manchanda, S. Chakraborty.
For the Respondents: Paramita Dhar, Debalay Bhattacharjee.

JUDGMENT :

AKIL ABDUL HAMID KURESHI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties for final disposal of the petition.

2. The petitioner has prayed that the respondent No. 1, High Court of Tripura should recommend his name to the State Government for appointment to Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I with consequential benefits.

3. Brief facts are as under:

Appointments and promotions to various posts in the Tripura Judicial Service are governed by the Tripura Judicial Service Rules, 2003 (hereinafter to be referred to as the said Rules). Rule 3 of the said Rules envisages constitution of a service known as Tripura Judicial Service which would be consisting of 3(three) grades of officers namely Judicial Officers Grade-I, Grade-II and Grade-III.

4. Rule 7 of the Rules pertains to method of recruitment, qualification, reservation and age limit. Under this Rule Tripura Judicial Service Grade-I posts would be filled up from the following sources:

“Method of Recruitment:

(i) Not exceeding 25% of the posts in the Grade may be filled by direct recruitment on the basis of the aggregate marks/grade

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