Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 62 (1.91 seconds)
Documents citing State Of U.P. And Anr vs M. J. Siddiqui And Ors on 31 March, 1980

Dr. Shiv Kumar Agarwal vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 16 July, 2024

In view of the above, all the above applications are allowed and the entire criminal proceedings of Special Case No. 18 of 2019 (State of U.P. vs Zakir Siddiqui and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 330 of 2017, under section 18/27 Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and sections 269, 327, 419, 420 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Pilibhit pending in the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge-VII, Bareilly and the impugned charge sheet dated 7.9.2017 are hereby quashed in the light of the judgements of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Sharma (supra) and Rakesh Kumar (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Roop Narayan Meena vs M/O Finance on 18 November, 2021

In our opinion, the High Court seems to have laid undue stress on the fact that the appellants were appointed on a temporary basis while overlooking the surrounding circumstances and the terms of the advertisement and the Rules, A referred to above, under which the appellants were appointed. We have already indicated that Rule 17(23 was the only Rule under which are temporary or an officiating appointment could be made by the Governor without reference to the Public Service Commission. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the appellants were appointed after reference to and on the recommendations of the Public Service Com- mission. The appointment of the appellants, therefore.would, not fall under Rule 17(2). What then is the nature of the appointments of the appellants is the serious question to be decided. In our opinion, reading the advertisement and the manner and mode of the appointment of the appellants, it must be held that they were appointed in a substantive capacity to temporary posts which according to the advertisement were likely to continue. There does not appear to be any magical formula or special charm in the word 'substantive'. The mere use of the term 'appointment in a temporary vacancy' by itself would not conclude the matter or lead to the irresistible inference that the appointment was not made in a substantive capacity because even a substantive appointment could be made to a purely temporary vacancy. In order, therefore, to determine the nature of the appointment, we have to look to the heart and substance of the matter, the surrounding circumstances, the mode, the manner and the terms of appointment and other relevant factors. In the instant case, we cannot ignore the advertisement which forms the pivotal basis of the direct recruitment in pursuance of which the appellants were appointed. Another circumstances that supports our view is that the appellants were not appointed merely on an ad hoc basis but through the Public Service Commission and in a regular way. Finally, the appellants were appointed to PMS I which was doubtless a superior service carrying a higher scale than PMS II of which the petitioners were members.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Radhey Shyam Patel vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 May, 2023

In case of State of U.P. And Anr. Vs. M.J. Siddiqui and Ors., AIR 1980 SC 1098, it is held that in order to determine the nature of the appointment, one has to look to the heart and substance of the matter, the surrounding circumstances, the mode, the manner and the terms of appointment and other relevant factors. As per fundamental rule 9(4), in a Government service there are different cadres. Normally cadre means the strength of a service or a part of a service sanctioned as a separate unit. Each of these cadres consists of a number of posts. These posts may be permanent or temporary. A permanent post is one which is sanctioned without limit of time. A temporary post denotes one which is sanctioned for a limited time and is very often outside the cadre.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Mohd. Sajid vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 May, 2023

In case of State of U.P. And Anr. Vs. M.J. Siddiqui and Ors., AIR 1980 SC 1098, it is held that in order to determine the nature of the appointment, one has to look to the heart and substance of the matter, the surrounding circumstances, the mode, the manner and the terms of appointment and other relevant factors. As per fundamental rule 9(4), in a Government service there are different cadres. Normally cadre means the strength of a service or a part of a service sanctioned as a separate unit. Each of these cadres consists of a number of posts. These posts may be permanent or temporary. A permanent post is one which is sanctioned without limit of time. A temporary post denotes one which is sanctioned for a limited time and is very often outside the cadre.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Pradeep Kumar vs Sate Of Rajasthan And Ors. on 19 March, 2002

In our opinion, the High Court seems to have led undue stress on the fact that the appellants were appointed on a temporary basis while over-looking the surrounding circumstances and the terms of advertisement and the rules, referred to above, under which the appellants were appointed ....... In order, therefore, to determine the nature of the appointment, we have to look to the heart and substance of the matter, the surrounding circumstances, the mode, the manner and the terms of the appointment and other relevant factors. In the instant case we cannot ignore the advertisement which forms the pivotal basis...
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 68 - Cited by 1 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Thomas Chandy vs Rajasthan Financial Corporation And ... on 6 April, 1998

In our opinion, the High Court seems to have led undue stress on the fact that the appellants were appointed on a temporary basis while over-looking the surrounding circumstances and the terms of advertisement and the rules, referred to above, under which the appellants were appointed.... In order, therefore, to determine the nature of the appointment, we have to look to the heart and substance of the matter, the surrounding circumstances, the mode, the manner and the terms of the appointment and other relevant factors. In the instant case we cannot ignore the advertisement which forms the pivotal basis...." (Emphasis added).
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 36 - Cited by 3 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Surendra Kumar Jalan And Ors. vs Calcutta Municipal Corporation And ... on 8 August, 2002

In the case of State of U.P. v. J. Singh , the question was whether the wrod "may" appearing in Rule 4(2) of the U.P. Disciplinary Proceedings (Administrative Tribunal) Rules, 1947 should be interpreted as "shall". The Supreme Court after considering the said provision held that the word "may" in the context of the rule should be read as "shall" and was obligatory in nature. I fail to understand how the said decision can have any application in the fact of the present case.
Calcutta High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - B Bhattacharya - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next