Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 92 (0.44 seconds)
Vinod Singh Sirohi vs State Of U.P.Throu.Prin.Secy.Home ... on 16 December, 2021 cites

State Of U.P. And Anr. vs Rajendra Singh Butola And Anr. on 8 December, 1999

(82) Considering the aforesaid dictum of the Apex Court and the facts that the appellants are members of the service and substantively appointed out of turn on the strength of the statutory Government Orders, we are of the view that the policy of the State Government issued vide order dated 23.07.2015 was legally justified and the learned Single Judge erred in quashing the Government Order dated 23.07.2015 and the seniority list (83) There is one another aspect also, of the issue. As stated hereinabove, the learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned order, has failed to appreciate the object of the Government Order dated 03.02.1994, its source, its nature etc. and also failed to appreciate the nature of the appointment of the appellants. Furthermore, the learned Single Judge has not considered Rule 3 (i) and part of Rule 3 (m) of the Rules, 2008, which was conjuncted after the word ''and'. Even the Governments Orders dated 05.11.1965, 29.08.1983 and 24.07.2003, which are the statutory orders as held by the Apex Court in Chandra Prakash Tiwari Vs. Shakuntala Shukla : AIR 2002 SC 2322 and by the Full Bench of this Court in State of U.P. and others Vs. Rajendra Singh and another : 2015 (4) ADJ 575 (LB) (FB), has not been appreciated.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 26 - S B Majmudar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next