Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Balwant Singh v. Member - WRIT - A No. 34292 of 1994 [2007] RD-AH 6195 (5 April 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).


Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

Heard Sri H.P. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri O.P. Rai and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner has challenged the order dated 6.10.1994 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) whereby Sri Sundar Lal Sharma has been directed to take over charge as Secretary at Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Naholi, Post Jindora, District Kanpur Dehat in addition to the post of Secretary, Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Turki Mau where he is already working.

It is said that the petitioner was appointed as In-charge Secretary, Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Naholi vide order dated 19.6.1986 passed by the Member Secretary, District Administrative Committee/District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, U.P., Kanpur Dehat in pursuance thereof he has taken charge and started working. Thereafter, the said order was cancelled by the respondent no. 2 whereagainst he filed Writ Petition No. 6905 of 1993 wherein an interim order was passed staying operation of the said order and therefore he could not have been dislodged by means of the order impugned in the writ petition. The Writ Petition No. 6905 of 1993 has been dismissed by this Court vide order of date. Even otherwise the appointment of the petitioner being wholly ad-hoc he has no right to continue on the said post particularly when he was not appointed on the said post in accordance with rules. On the contrary, Sri Sundar Lal Sharma is a regularly appointed Secretary and has been given additional charge of Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Naholi. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any legal or otherwise right vested in the petitioner either under the rules or under the order of appointment entitling him to continue on the post of Secretary.

Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.




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


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 |

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