Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DHARMENDRA SHUKLA versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY BASIC EDU. U.P. GOVT. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dharmendra Shukla v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Basic Edu. U.P. Govt. & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 371 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 9101 (8 May 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

CJ's Court

Special Appeal No.371 of 2006

Dharmendra Shukla

Vs.

State of U.P. & Others

Hon'ble Ajoy Nath Ray, CJ.

Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

This appeal is from an interim order passed by an Hon'ble Single Judge dated the 24th of February, 2006. It was passed in favour of certain non-selectees in regard to a selection process undertaken in 2004-2005, the details of which we have mentioned in our order disposing of Special Appeal No.602 of 2005: Ramakant Dubey & Others Vs. State of U.P. & Others. In aid of that appeal, the Court of appeal had passed a favourable interim order on 17.5.2005 in favour of the selected candidates. We have today dismissed the appeal and vacated and discharged the interim order. On the basis of the favourable order obtained by the purportedly selected candidates, the writ petitioners in this appeal, somehow managed to obtain an interim order in aid of their writ petition. The writ petitioners are continuing in some working capacity, the details of which we have not examined; they do not appear to be confirmed and selected post holders yet. Thus, their obtaining an interim order by showing an appellate court order, which had been passed for the benefit of the opposing group, namely, the selectees in the now set aside selection process, was wholly erroneous. The interim order was wrongly obtained.

As such, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 24.2.2006 is set aside. The allowing of the appeal will not be taken as any adverse decision against the writ petitioners, or validity or appropriateness of their tenure, or expectations of obtaining such valid or secure tenure. We have not either examined or entered into these matters.

The appeal is thus, allowed.  

Dt/-8.5.2006

RKK/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.