Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.22 seconds)Direct Recruit Class Ii Engineering ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 2 May, 1990
21. Only escape from such a conclusion would be, if the
petitioners were to demonstrate that the quota rule had broken
down, in that situation, the proposition laid down by the
Supreme Court in case of The Direct Recruit Class II
Engineering Officers' Association and ors vs. State of
Maharashtra and ors. (supra) would apply. Here also the facts
are plain. The respondents pointed out that, in three lots, direct
selection process had been undertaken and actual recruitment
made. We have noted such dates emerging from the affidavit-
in-reply of the State Government. It shows that, such
recruitment had been undertaken through the GPSC and officers
in three different batches were directly recruited. This is not a
case where, for years together, no direct selection could take
place for whatever reason. In the public employment,
particularly, where lengthy procedure is to be followed, some
delay, though not desirable, is quite inevitable. Merely because
Page 17 of 18
HC-NIC Page 17 of 18 Created On Fri Feb 12 01:33:35 IST 2016
C/SCA/833/2000 JUDGMENT
for a couple of years between the three direct selection attempts,
no recruitment could take place, would not be sufficient to come
to a conclusion that the quota rule had hopelessly broken down.
If, in the meantime, the promotee officers were promoted in
excess of the promotion quota and thus occupied the quota
reserved for direct recruits, surely they cannot claim benefits of
such service for the purpose of seniority.
Keshav Chandra Joshi And Ors. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors on 6 November, 1990
In my opinion, the
principles applied by the Government in fixation of inter se
seniority of promotees and direct recruit is legal and, is
supported by long line of judgements, particularly, in case of
N.K.Chauhan and ors. vs. State of Gujarat and ors.(supra), The
Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association and
ors vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. (supra) as explained by
Keshav Chandra Joshi and ors vs. Union of India and ors
(supra).
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
P. Sudhakar Rao & Ors vs U. Govinda Rao & Ors on 3 July, 2013
In case of P. Sudhakar Rao
and ors vs. U. Govinda Rao and ors. reported in (2013) 8 SCC
693, it was held that to oppose the scrutiny of Article 14 of the
Constitution, the seniority to the Supervisors could be reckoned
only from the date, on which, they satisfied all the real and
objective procedural requirements of the Andhra Pradesh
Engineering Service Rules and the law laid down by the
Supreme Court.
A. Janardhana vs Union Of India And Others on 26 April, 1983
In case of A.Janardhana vs. Union of India and ors
reported in (1983) 3 SCC 601, it was reiterated that the direct
recruits, who comes into service after the promotee was already
unconditionally and without reservation promoted and whose
promotion is not shown to be invalid or illegal according to the
relevant statutory or non-statutory rules should not be permitted
by a principle of seniority to score the march over a promotee
because that itself being arbitrary would be violative of Articles
14 and 16.
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1