Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. MANJU AND OTHERS versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Manju And Others v. Union Of India And Others - WRIT - A No. 12552 of 2004 [2004] RD-AH 177 (26 March 2004)

 

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

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.  

The petitioners have, inter alia, sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to regularize their services on the post of Women Facilitator or at any other post according to their educational qualifications besides a writ of mandamus commanding respondent no. 3 to treat them in continuous service on the said post of Women Facilitator in the agriculture department and to pay their salary regularly.

The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the Government of India had floated a scheme for women in agriculture under which they were appointed as Women Facilitators on 15.11.1994, 1.6.1998 and 10.10.1995 respectively and each of the three petitioners have completed for more than five years on the post. It is alleged that the petitioners have come to know orally that the scheme floated by the Government of India is to expire on 31.3.2004 and the petitioners have moved representations to continue them in service if the scheme is not abolished.

Admittedly there is no material before the Court to come to the conclusion that the said scheme is to expire on 31.3.2004. They themselves admit that their knowledge about the expiry of the scheme on 31.3.204 is based on oral information. This petition is therefore based on presumption. Moreover, the services of the petitioners are on contract basis and have been extended from time to time. This petition is therefore premature and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

The petition is accordingly dismissed as premature with directions that in case the scheme continues the services of the petitioners shall be extended by the authorities concerned as was done earlier. No order as to costs.  

Dated: 26-3-2004

Rpk/


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.