Search Results for "Adhoc promotion"

43 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 43 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Transfer Order of Government Officer in Town Planning Department — Upholds State's Power of Transfer as an Incident of Service. Transfer Order Issued in Public Interest and Not Vitiated by Malafides or Violation of Statutory Rules.

The petitioner, Shri Noreshwar Raghunathrao Shende, was serving as Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State, Pune. He was transferred to the post ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Seniority Dispute Over Catch-Up Rule for Reserved Category Promotions. Consequential Seniority for Scheduled Caste Promotee Upheld as Regular Promotion Not Fortuitous.

The case involves a seniority dispute between two officers of the Government of Maharashtra: Sudhakar Baburao Nangnure (appellant, open category) and ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Government Engineer Seeking Antedated Promotion. Petitioner's claim for regular promotion from 2004 rejected as ad-hoc promotion in 2005 did not confer right to retrospective regularisation.

The petitioner, Shri S. Lekshmanan, was appointed as Junior Engineer (Electrical) on 04.06.1979 and promoted to Assistant Engineer on 15.07.1996. He c...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition by Union of India and Commissioner of Central Excise Challenging CAT Order Quashing Reversion of Adhoc Promotee. Reversion of an employee promoted on adhoc basis upon revocation of suspension is illegal; employee entitled to reinstatement in promotional post.

The Union of India and the Commissioner of Central Excise filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Mum...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Claim for Seniority in CGHS Promotion Dispute. Seniority Determined by Date of Regular Appointment, Not Ad Hoc Promotion, Under Central Civil Services Rules.

The petitioner, Arjun Sopan Gaikwad, was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk on 16 October 1978 and promoted to Upper Division Clerk on 9 April 1984. ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Retired Government Servant's Petition Challenging Tribunal Order on Promotion Claims. Petitioner's claim for promotion from 1979 rejected due to delay and laches as he approached Tribunal in 1991 after retirement in 1988.

The petitioner, Gopalrao Ambadasrao Borikar, a retired Deputy Collector, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Court Upholds Recruitment Rules of 2015, Dismisses Petition Challenging RFO Seniority List. Petitioners' reliance on superseded 1998 Rules and failure to include all affected parties lead to dismissal; seniority list validated under 2015 Rules.

The petitioners challenged the seniority list based on the Recruitment Rules of 1998, arguing against the application of the Recruitment Rules of 2015...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Assistant Professors' Writ Petition for Time-Bound Promotion. Court holds that the benefit of time-bound promotion under Government Resolution dated 15-04-1999 is available from the date of initial appointment, and denial by management is arbitrary.

The petitioners, ten Assistant Professors employed at Yeshwantrao Chavan Mahavidyalaya, Tuljapur, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Const...