Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.32 seconds)
Mohd Ajmal vs State Of Raj & Ors on 12 January, 2011 cites

Chhagan Lal Sharma And Anr vs State Of Raj & Ors on 3 December, 2010

I am not persuaded by this argument because in Chhagan Lal Sharma's case, supra, learned counsel appearing for petitioners jointly submitted before the coordinate bench that respondents have initiated fresh process for making appointment which would show that that method has been adopted by them with an object to replace persons already in service and such action is wholly arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution. Said argument was not upheld by the court. It was further argued that such of persons who have continued with respondents under interim order passed by the court, should be held entitled to pay for the period during which they served respondents under such interim orders, the court directed the respondents to pay salary to respective petitioners, if not paid so far, and further directed that if such salary is not paid so far, the same shall be paid to each of petitioners within one month from the date of submission of copy of said order.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 2 - Cited by 17 - A Rastogi - Full Document
1   2 Next