AI Overview...
-
Justice Sujoy Paul’s Judgment on Seniority - The judgment emphasizes that seniority lists should not be subject to frequent disputes, advocating for stability and finality in seniority determinations. It clarifies that service rendered earlier should be counted towards seniority when selections are made under specific rules, such as Rule 225(2) of the relevant service rules. The judgment also underscores that seniority disputes should be resolved with caution to prevent unnecessary litigation and that once finalized, seniority lists should not be routinely reopened for debate BIKAS PAL vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS - Tripura, 010016692019, 010014332019.
-
Scope and Application - The judgment notes that explanations and rules like Rule 3.17 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules have limited scope and should not be invoked to challenge seniority lists unless there is a clear violation or grave injustice. It highlights that the scope of seniority rules must be understood in context, and judicial review should be confined to cases of substantive violations rather than routine disagreements Dr. Rakesh Lodha vs Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare - Central Administrative Tribunal.
-
Judicial Approach and Finality - The judgments by Justice Arindam Lodh and others reinforce the principle that seniority lists, once finalized, should be treated as conclusive, and frequent debates undermine administrative stability. The courts have consistently held that service records and seniority should be maintained with integrity, and disputes should be resolved with judicial restraint BIKAS PAL vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS - Tripura, 010016692019.
-
Specific Cases and References - In cases like Sujoy Paul’s judgment and other consolidated judgments, the courts have examined whether seniority disputes involve substantive violations or mere procedural disagreements. The courts have emphasized the importance of a careful and limited review, cautioning against reopening settled seniority lists unless justified by significant errors or injustice V.Praveen Kumar vs The State of Telangana - Telangana, ANIRBAN PAL vs P N B AND ORS - Calcutta.
Analysis and Conclusion:
Justice Sujoy Paul’s judgment on seniority advocates for stability, finality, and restraint in disputing seniority lists. It underscores that once seniority is finalized following proper procedures, it should not be routinely challenged, and disputes should be limited to cases of substantive violations. The judgment also clarifies that rules like Rule 3.17 are not broadly applicable to challenge seniority unless specific violations are demonstrated. Overall, the approach promotes administrative efficiency and judicial restraint in seniority matters.
Search Results for "Justice Sujoy Pal Judgment on Seniority"
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 9949 • India - Central Administrative Tribunal
Mrs. Pratima K Gupta, J, Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, A
No benefit can be derived by the State on behalf of the judgment because Rule 3.17 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol.II has not been discussed in the judgment. ... A Division Bench judgment in case of Smt. Ramesh Tuli Vs. ... Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kesar Chand v. ... The order, therefore, confirms that the applicants may have been similarly/identically placed, however, for the intervention of the Ministry of Law & Justice, the relief c....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 2180 • India - Calcutta High Court
JUDGMENT : Sujoy Paul, J. The Challenge: 1. ... In any case, immediately in a fortnight, on 1-8- 2014, the petitioner had made a representation to Hon’ble the President of India as well as the Chief Justice of India, with a copy to the Chief Justice of the M.P. ... With the greatest of respect, both the Single Bench as also the Division Bench of the High Court have overlooked the scope and ambit of the Explanation which has no application in the State to seniority. ... To clarify the petitioner shall no....
• India - Tripura
A seniority list of a cadre should not be made the subject matter of debate too often. ... 225 (2 Judge Bench), selected then the service rendered by them earlier shall be counted for the purpose of seniority ... JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
• India - High Court of Tripura
A seniority list of a cadre should not be made the subject matter of debate too often. ... 225 (2 Judge Bench), selected then the service rendered by them earlier shall be counted for the purpose of seniority ... JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
• India - Tripura
A seniority list of a cadre should not be made the subject matter of debate too often. ... 225 (2 Judge Bench), selected then the service rendered by them earlier shall be counted for the purpose of seniority ... JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
• India - High Court of Tripura
A seniority list of a cadre should not be made the subject matter of debate too often. ... 225 (2 Judge Bench), selected then the service rendered by them earlier shall be counted for the purpose of seniority ... JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
• India - Tripura
JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ... JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ... Thus, the seniority list was finalized. ... State of Tripura & Ors.] are consolidated or clustered for disposal by a common judgment inasmuch the question 28.08.2017 of Judgment
• India - Tripura
JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ... JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ... Thus, the seniority list was finalized. ... State of Tripura & Ors.] are consolidated or clustered for disposal by a common judgment inasmuch the question 28.08.2017 of Judgment
2024 0 Supreme(Del) 478 • India - Delhi
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
Learned senior counsel has submitted that such reason can only be if the trial court judgment is likely to result in a "grave miscarriage of justice". ... In consequence there might be miscarriage of justice. ... Darshan Pal Singh, 2012 SCC OnLine P&H 19590 & State of Odisha vs. Debasis Dixit[CRLLP No. 26 of 2016; Judgment dated. 13.01.2023]. ... Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that in Sujoy Mangesh Poyarekar (supra), the judgment of Sita Ram Vs. ... ....
2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 39837 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUJOY PAUL, NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, JJ
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Hyderabad and Others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 19.11.2024 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO p class ... : ___________________ SUJOY PAUL, J _____________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO....
Filter by Legal Phrase
