Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Considers Seniority Entitlement of Ad Hoc Promotees Under Uttaranchal Civil Services Rules. The Court Examines Whether Ad Hoc Service Counts for Seniority in Promotion to Deputy Collector.

Admin
2026-08-01 03:30:37
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (07) 37

Civil Appeal Nos. 3070, 3072, 4452, 3071 of 2024

2026-07-29

Alok Aradhe, J.

2026 INSC 759

State of Uttarakhand

Jagdish Chandra Kandpal & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Service matter regarding seniority of promotees and counting of ad hoc service

Filing Reason

Appeals arising from the High Court judgment dated 08.08.2019 in W.P. (S/B) No. 68 of 2013

Previous Decisions

High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital passed impugned final judgment and order dated 08.08.2019

Issues

Entitlement of promotees to count their ad hoc service for the purpose of computing seniority

Judgment Excerpts

These batch of Civil Appeals involve the question of entitlement of the promotees to count their ad hoc service for the purposes of computing seniority. The DPC recommended 10 Tehsildars, including the promotees for promotion to the post of Deputy Collector on ad hoc basis.

Procedural History

The respondents filed Writ Petition (S/B) No. 68 of 2013 before the High Court of Uttarakhand. The High Court passed the impugned final judgment and order dated 08.08.2019. Aggrieved by the said order, the State of Uttarakhand and others filed the present civil appeals before the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
ad hoc service seniority promotees Deputy Collector Departmental Promotion Committee

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Public Trust Dispute — Upholds Rejection of Change Report for Non-Compliance with Statutory Requirements. The court held that the appellant failed to establish compliance with Section 22 of the Bombay Pu... 2026-08-01 03:30:37
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Appellant in Industrial Dispute As Labour Court Retains Jurisdiction Under Section 33(3) Despite Disposal of Main Reference. Application for Discharge of Protected Workman Must Be Decided on Merits Even After Award of Reference;... 2026-08-01 03:30:37
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition acquittal natural justice murder Compensation burden of proof benefit of doubt Limitation Article 226 circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment Case — ...

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and La...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Death Not Arising Out of Use ...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Claimant in Motor Accident Case — Functional Disability A...

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Forgery Case Due to Long Pendency and No Criminal Antec...

Supreme Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Rajya Sabha Nomination Due ...

Supreme Court Allows Pension to Casual Labourers with Temporary Status in Department of Po...

Lost Your Password?