Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Tushar Kanti Mondal vs State Of West Bengal . And Ors. on 26 April, 2017

Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, Uday Umesh Lalit

                                                             1

     ITEM NO.13                                      COURT NO.11                     SECTION XVI

                                     S U P R E M E C O U R T O F             I N D I A
                                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).                             26096/2012

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27/06/2011
     in WPST No. 1148/2008, 06/02/2012 in RVW No. 174/2011, 06/02/2012
     in CAN No. 8758/2011 passed by the High Court Of Calcutta)

     TUSHAR KANTI MONDAL                                                           Petitioner(s)

                                                          VERSUS

     STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.                                                   Respondent(s)

     (With appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and interim relief and
     office report)

     Date : 26/04/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT

     For Petitioner(s)                       Mr. Arun K. Sinha,Adv.
                                             Mr. Haresh Bhati,Adv.

     For Respondent(s)                       Mr. Kunal Chatterji,Adv.
                                             Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli,Adv.

                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                           O R D E R

It is pointed that under Rule 4 of the West Bengal Services (Determination of Seniority) Rules, 1981, a person selected earlier is senior irrespective of the date of appointment.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State points out that the petitioner was appointed later as compared to the private Signature Not Verified respondent(s) and was thus junior.

Digitally signed by

MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2017.04.29 10:39:31 IST Reason:

It is, however, not clear as to why the petitioner who was selected in the earlier batch of selection was appointed later. 2 Learned counsel for the respondent-State seeks time to ascertain the factual position.

List again on Monday, the 1st May, 2017.

(MAHABIR SINGH)                                (HARESH SINGH NEGI)
 COURT MASTER                                     COURT MASTER