Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUBHASH CHANDRA DUBEY versus THE STATE PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Subhash Chandra Dubey v. The State Pradesh State Road Transport Corp. & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 153 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 15047 (5 September 2007)

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 AT ALLAHABAD

CJ's Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 153 (DEFECTIVE) OF 2007.

Subhash Chanda Dubey, s/o Ram Sewak Sharma,

R/o 3/405 Pushp Bihar, Awas Vikas Colony,

Chandausi, Moradabad.

............Petitioner/Appellant.

Versus

1. The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation,

through its Managing Director, Tedhi Kothi, Lukcnow.

2. The Regional Manager, Moradabad Region, Moradabad.

3. The Assistant Regional Manager, Peetal Nagar Depot,

Moradabad.

.......Respondents.

CORAM: Hon'ble H.L. Gokhale, CJ.

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar,J.

Date: 05.09.2007

Advocate for the appellant: Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena

Advocate for the respondents: Sri Anurag Khanna

Oral Judgement (Per: H. L. Gokhale, CJ.)

1. Heard Mr. Yogesh Kumar Saxena in support of this appeal and Mr. Anurag Khanna appearing for the respondents.

2. The appellant seeks to challenge the judgement and order dated 11th January, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

3. The appellant herein, in the writ petition had challenged the order dated 29th September, 2006 whereby the appellant was placed in the post of Booking Clerk. He was earlier working as Assistant Traffic Inspector. Reasons are given in the order namely, that service record of the year 2004-05 was not found to be satisfactory. The entry was communicated to the appellant on 10th August, 2005. The appellant did not file any representation immediately against the same.

4. That apart, the order states that the salary of the two posts were similar and appellant's working as Assistant Traffic Inspector was not satisfactory. Therefore, he was transferred to the post of Booking Clerk.

5. Learned Single Judge has taken note of the fact that both the posts are equivalent and salary of the post of Assistant Traffic Inspector is same to that of Booking Clerk. This being the position, the writ petition came to be dismissed.

6. We do not find any error in the order of the learned Single Judge.

7. In view of what has been stated above, this appeal is dismissed.

Date: 05.09.2007.

HR

(Chief Justice)

(Anjani Kumar,J.)


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.