Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.55 seconds)B. N. Nagarajan And Ors vs State Of Mysore And Ors on 1 March, 1966
4. No exception is or can be taken on behalf of the promotees to the finding arrived at by the High Court that the appointment of direct recruits to the posts of Assistant Engineers was in order, in view of the judgment of this Court in B.N. Nagarajan v. State of Mysore (supra). Nor can it be urged with any plausibility on behalf of direct recruits that the appointment of the promotees as Assistant Engineers prior to the enforcement of the Recruitment Rules lay outside the powers of the Government or was otherwise illegal. The real dispute between the direct recruits and the promotees revolves round the quality of the tenure held by the latter immediately prior to the enforcement of the Recruitment Rules and that is so because of the language employed in Rule 2 of the Seniority Rules. The relevant portion of that rule is extracted below:
Article 162 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
R. P. Khanna & Ors vs S.A.F. Abbas & Ors. Etc on 22 February, 1972
Both these claims were accepted by the High Court, the first on the basis of the decision of this Court in Ram Prakash Khanna and Ors. v. S.A.F. Abbas with the pleadings of the parties and the various orders issued by the State Government and mentioned above, and the second on the authority of another decision of this Court in V.B. Badami and Ors. v. State of Mysore and Ors. . The High Court accordingly held that the quota rule would not be attracted to the case of those promotees who had been appointed to the posts of Assistant Engineers with effect from a date prior to the 1st of March, 1958. By way of a 'clarification' the High Court further ruled that the promotion of the 107 officers working in the Merged State of Mysore was made to substantive posts of Assistant Engineers with effect from the 1st of November, 1956, and that the State Government or the direct recruits could not be allowed to urge to the contrary. According to the High Court such promotion was subject to review only if the course was warranted and necessitated by the final inter se seniority list of Junior Engineers, the right to review having been reserved by the Government in its orders dated the 27th of February, 1962.
V. B. Badami Etc vs State Of Mysore & Ors on 17 September, 1975
Both these claims were accepted by the High Court, the first on the basis of the decision of this Court in Ram Prakash Khanna and Ors. v. S.A.F. Abbas with the pleadings of the parties and the various orders issued by the State Government and mentioned above, and the second on the authority of another decision of this Court in V.B. Badami and Ors. v. State of Mysore and Ors. . The High Court accordingly held that the quota rule would not be attracted to the case of those promotees who had been appointed to the posts of Assistant Engineers with effect from a date prior to the 1st of March, 1958. By way of a 'clarification' the High Court further ruled that the promotion of the 107 officers working in the Merged State of Mysore was made to substantive posts of Assistant Engineers with effect from the 1st of November, 1956, and that the State Government or the direct recruits could not be allowed to urge to the contrary. According to the High Court such promotion was subject to review only if the course was warranted and necessitated by the final inter se seniority list of Junior Engineers, the right to review having been reserved by the Government in its orders dated the 27th of February, 1962.
State Of Mysore & Anr vs S. V. Narayanappa on 22 August, 1966
In Nanjundappa's case also the question of regularisation of an appointment arose and this Court dealt with it thus:
1