Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(1)AWC694; (2001)1UPLBEC371
o. p. garg, j.1. an advertisement was published in the daily news papers on 10th august, 1998 inviting applications on or before 31.8.1998 for appointment to the twentythree posts of junior assistant in the pay scale of rs. 3,050-4,950 issued by the district magistrate, baghpat--respondent no. 2. out of these 23 vacancies, 12 were earmarked for other backward class communities, 1 for scheduled caste and 1 for scheduled tribes. a true copy of the advertisement has been enclosed as annexure-1 to the writ petition. the petitioners also applied for their appointment to the post of junior assistant. roll no. 000502 was allotted to the petitioner no. 1 and no. 000713 to the petitioner no. 2. both the petitioners were declared successful in the written test. thereafter, a typing test was held on 17.3.1999 and then the petitioners were called for interview. in the final result which was declared on 31.3.2000. the names of the petitioners did not find a place. it is alleged that though the number of vacancies were notified as 23 in theadvertisement dated 10.8.1998. only 18 candidates were selected whose names figured in the final result. it is also alleged that the calculation of marks of the petitioners was incorrect and if the marks are calculated accurately, the petitioners would have been declared successful. according to the petitioners, the petitioner no. 1 has secured 101 marks and petitioner no. 2 has secured 84 marks in the written examination. according to rule 5 of the u. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2004(3)AWC2743
m. katju and poonam srivastava, jj.1. heard learned counsel for the parties.2. by means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the 'uttar pradesh rural engineering (group 'a') services (fourth amendment) rules, 2003, whereby rule 5 of the said rule has been amended by means of notification no. 85cm/62-3-2003-9res/2003, in exercise of powers granted by proviso to article 309 of the constitution of india. the old rule of 1991 wherein the criteria for promotion to the post of chief engineer has been amended. the old rule provided that the promotions to the post of chief engineer (grade ii) was to be made amongst the substantively appointed superintending engineer who had completed in the year of their recruitment at least six years service as superintending engineer and a total period of 25 years of service. this rule has been substituted by the amending rule-the post of chief engineer (grade ii) will be filled by promotion from the substantively appointed superintending engineers.3. the petitioner has challenged the amended rule on the ground that it has been enacted mala fide and with an intention to given promotion to respondent no. 3 on the post of chief engineer on regular basis defeating the judgment of this court dated 11.3.2003 in civil misc. writ petition no. 4927 of 2003 and is motivated with mala fide reasons. it has also been challenged on the ground that amended rule is illegal, arbitrary and unfair and gives liberty to promote any person on pick .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3079
m. katju, j.1. this writ petition has been filed against the impugned judgment of the central administrative tribunal dated 6.11.97 (annexure-11 to the petition) praying for a mandamus directing the respondents to consider the upgradation of the petitioners to the post of superintendent of central excise on the basis of their total length of service in the department disregarding the seniority list prepared by the department.2. we have heard learned counsel for the parties. the petitioners are all inspectors in the central excise department who were appointed prior to 2.8.82 as stated in paragraph 2 of the writ petition. it appears that the ministry of finance, government of india issued a letter dated 10.9.96 (annexure-1 to the petition) addressed to all the heads of department under the central board of excise and customs and conveyed the sanction for upgradation of 716 posts of inspectors to the post of superintendent in various central excise departments. thereafter the central government issued a letter dated 23.7.96 to all the commissioners of the central excise mentioning the manner in which the upgradation is to be done. the petitioners have urged that they were entitled to be appointed against the upgraded post of superintendent on the basis of their length of service but instead their juniors have been appointed superintendents whereas the petitioners have remained as inspector. the petitioners' contention is that the entire service as inspector is to be seen and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2009(121)FLR396]; JT2009(3)SC202; 2009(3)SCALE521; (2009)4SCC753; 2010(1)SLJ131(SC):2009AIRSCW2374:2009(2)LHSC871
markandey katju, j.1. this appeal by special leave has been filed against the judgment and order dated 3.11.2006 in civil misc. writ petition no. 78513 of 2005 of the high court of judicature at allahabad.2. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. the dispute in this appeal is regarding the validity of rule 5(ii) of the u.p. public works department group-b civil engineering service rules 2004 (in short `the 2004 rules').4. rule 5 of the 2004 rules states:5. recruitment to the posts in the service shall be made from the following sources:(i) fifty percent by direct recruitment through the commission.(ii) fifty percent by promotion through the commission from amongst the substantively appointed junior engineers (civil) and junior engineers (technical) who have completed seven years service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment. provided that the promotion shall be made in such a manner that ninety percent posts shall be filled up by junior engineers (civil) and ten percent posts shall be filled up by junior engineers (technical). 5. the dispute is between the junior engineers of the pwd department of the u.p. government who are degree holders and those who are only diploma holders.6. the submission of shri b.a. bobde, learned counsel for the appellants (the degree holders) is that while the u.p. service of engineers (building and road branch) (class ii) rules, 1936 (in short `the 1936 rules) provided in rule 9(ii) thereof that no junior .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(8)SCALE491; (2008)6SCC797; 2008AIRSCW4029
s.b. sinha, j.1. leave granted.2. inter se seniority amongst the teachers of kumaon university is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 21.3.2006 passed by a division bench of the high court of uttaranchal at nainital in writ petition no. 71 of 2004).before adverting to the aforementioned question, we may notice the factual matrix involved in the matter.3. first respondent was appointed on an ad hoc basis as a lecturer in government p.g. college, almora by the state of utter pradesh through vice-chancellor, kumaon university on or about 22.9.1975. the said college was declared as the campus college of the university. all lecturers including the first respondent were continued and treated on deputation with the university; the cut off date wherefor was fixed 16.8.1977. the state of utter pradesh framed u.p. regularization rules, 1979, the relevant provisions whereof reads as under:4.(i) any person who (i) was directly appointed on ad hoc basis before 1.1.1977 and is continuing in service. (ii) possessed requisite qualification prescribed for regular appointment at the time of such ad hoc appointment, and(iii) has completed or, as the case may be, after he has completed three years continuous service. shall be considered for regular appointment in permanent or temporary vacancy as may be available on regular appointment is made in such vacancy in accordance with the relevant service rules or orders.4. pursuant to and in furtherance of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2006(10)SCALE499; (2006)10SCC621; 2007(2)SLJ218(SC)
s.b. sinha, j.1. respondents herein at all material times were and still are working as draughtsmen in the ordnance factory belonging to union of india. the pay scale of the draughtsmen employed in the central public works department (cpwd) were revised on the basis of the report of the third pay commission from 1.1.1973 in the following terms:(i) draughtsman - i rs. 425-700(ii) draughtsman - ii rs. 330-560(iii) draughtsman - iii rs. 260-430 2. they were not satisfied therewith as a result whereof dispute raised by them which was referred to a board of arbitration. by an award dated 20th june, 1980, the pay scales of draughtsmen were revised as under:(i) draughtsman - i rs. 550-750(ii) draughtsman - ii rs. 425-700(iii) draughtsman - iii rs. 330-560 3. it was directed in the said award that the scale of pay would come into force with effect from 1.1.1973 but for computation of arrears the date of reckoning shall be 28/29th july, 1978. the pay scales of draughtsmen of cpwd were revised. the draughtsmen employed in some departments other than cpwd claimed revision of their pay scales by raising a similar demand in the light of the revision of pay scales in cpwd. acceding thereto, an office memorandum dated 13.3.1984 was issued stating:sub: revision of pay scales of draughtsman grade - iii, ii & i in all govt. of india offices on the basis of award of board of arbitration in the case of central public works department. the undersigned is directed to state that committee of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1986(26)ELT918(Del)
sunanda bhandare, j.1. the petitioners, a hindu undivided family firm registered under the indian partnership act, 1932 carry on the business as exporters of iron ore at margao, goa. the facts of the case as stated in the petition lie in a very narrow compass. the petitioners entered into a contract on 26th may, 1966 with a japanese company for sale of goan iron ore on the terms and conditions mentioned in the contract. the total quantity to be sold was 2 lacs dry metric tonnes of iron ore. the petitioners shipped from marmagoa harbour eight consignments of 1.56,421 metric tonnes of goan iron ore by certain steamers. the relevant sniping bills were presented to the customs authorities at marmagoa in respect of these, consignments. major part of the iron ore fines allowed in each of the shipment was authorised by the directorate mines, government of goa who had issued permits authorising export of said iron ore fines. the case of the petitioners is that the description of these goods in the shipping bills was made as goan iron ore in accordance with the description given in the said contract. however, since customs authorities at margao, goa insisted they also added the word 'lumpy' in the description of the goods. the duty paid by the petitioners in respect of the said export was recovered from the petitioners on provisional basis on the footing that the entire quantity was lumpy iron ore in dry condition. this was subject to the final analysis to be made by italab (goa) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 131(2006)DLT636
mukul mudgal, j.1. this writ petition challenges the order dated 17th december, 2003 delivered by the central administrative tribunal, delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'cat'). the writ petition was occasioned by the challenge raised by the respondents seeking a quashing of the office order dated 1st august, 2002 and the subsequent office order dated 11th march, 2003 merging the two cadres of civil and electric streams of c.p.w.d., leading to the post of promotion to the post of additional director general.2. the case of the respondents/applicants before the cat, was as follows:a. the central public works department ( in short 'cpwd') was formed in 1930 for design, construction and maintenance of central government buildings. right from the inception the civil stream and the electrical stream were made distinct and separate and were governed by separate 1954 rules drawn under article 309 of the constitution of india. there were separate sub-divisions head by the chief engineers (civil) or electrical. there were also posts of additional director general which were filled from eligible chief engineers(civil/electrical) and also the post of the director general (works) required to be filled by promotion from the post of additional director general.b. from 1996, civil and electrical streams were governed by the newly formed rules, which maintained the distinct entities of the civil and the electrical streams right up to the rank of chief engineer. the impugned office orders .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. leave granted. 2. this appeal is directed against the final judgment and order of the high court of judicature at kolkata dated 1st september, 2009, in f.m.a. no. 807 of 2009. the division bench of the high court in the impugned order dismissed the appeal of the appellants thereby affirming the order passed by the learned single judge in w.p. no. 18313 of 2004, directing the appellants herein, to inform the respondents about the marks obtained by them in the examination in question and grant promotion to the respondents pursuant to the result of the departmental examination. 3. the respondents are employees of the appellants, i.e., department of telecommunication within the department of post & telegraph, government of india, now renamed bharat sanchar nigam limited. they appeared in an examination for being promoted to junior accounts officers. junior accounts officers service postal wing (group c) recruitment rules, 1977 regulate recruitment and conditions of service for this post. the rules provided for a two stage departmental examination for appointment to this post. 4. the appellants conducted the aforementioned departmental examination on 20th february, 1999, 21st february, 1999 & 22nd february, 1999 for appointing junior accounts officers in the department of telecommunication under the ministry of communication. the respondents appeared in the said examination; however, when the result consisting of lists featuring names of both successful and unsuccessful .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
g. s. singhvi, j.1. leave granted.2. on being selected by the district level committee which had considered the candidature of those sponsored by the employment exchanges, respondent nos.1 to 13 were appointed as masters in the subjects of science, maths and social studies, respondent no.14 was appointed as physical training instructor and respondent no.15 was appointed as hindi teacher purely on ad hoc basis between 1994 and 1996 by the district education officers. the relevant portions of one such order issued on 16.10.1995 are reproduced below:office of the distt.education officer, panipatorder no.e-1/95/3515-65dated panipat 16.10.1995on the recommendation of the distt. level committee, the following candidates are hereby appointed purely on ad hoc basis as master/mistresses in the subject noted against them in the haryana education service non gazetted class ii (school cadre) men/women branch (as the case may be) w.e.f. the they join their duty in the institution indicated against their names in the grade of rs.1400-2600 plus usual allowances sanctioned by the haryana government from time to time on the following terms and conditions:- |sl.no |name and address of |place of |remarks || |the candidate |posting | | s.s. master (male), general category|1 to 3 |xxxxxx |xxxxxxx |xxxxxxx | s,s. master (male) b.c. category|1. |xxxxxx |xxxxxxx |xxxxxxx | s,s. master, s.c. category (male) block a|1. |xxxxxx |xxxxxxx |xxxxxxx | s,s. master, block b|2. |xxxxxx |xxxxxxx |xxxxxxx | .....
Tag this Judgment!