Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)
Sri Ajoy Choudhury vs North East Regional Agricultural ... on 12 June, 2017 cites

Court In The Case Of Secretary, State Of ... vs . Uma on 9 April, 2015

8. Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel has categorically submitted that the petitioner does not have any right, substantive or of any other nature to claim regularization, because the NERAMAC does not have any statutory scheme or otherwise to regularize the employees. As a committee constituted by it has carried out a study or that committee has recommended certain procedure that will not infer any right to the petitioner to claim regularization. Further, the petitioner no.1 knowing full well that his appointment would be governed by the provision of the contract he had accepted the engagement. Other petitioners were not even selected following any transparent procedure of selection as they were so engaged for attending the stop-gap requirement and as such in view of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others vs. Uma Devi (3) and others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, they cannot claim regularization at all because that will be denial of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as other persons having required eligibility did not get any opportunity to be filtered through the process of selection. Mr. Deb, learned counsel has pointedly submitted that the petitioners cannot get any relief by means of this writ petition as according to him they have failed to demonstrate existence of any substantive right in W.P.(C) No. 168 of 2012 7 their favour inasmuch as the onus of parity has to be discharged by them.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 1 - Cited by 2142 - Full Document
1