Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THAKUR PRASAD CHAND versus UNION OF INDIA THRU' SECY. DEPTT. OF POSTS & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Thakur Prasad Chand v. Union Of India Thru' Secy. Deptt. Of Posts & Ors. - WRIT - A No. 17139 of 2002 [2005] RD-AH 4459 (19 October 2005)

 

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

COURT NO.34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 17139 of 2002

Thakur Prasad Chand

Versus

The Union of India & Ors.

AND

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.49253 of 2002

Thakur Prasd Chand

Versus

The Union of India & Ors.

Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Bharati Sapru, J.

Both the petitions have been filed by the same petitioner and in both these petitions, the issue of appointment of Extra Departmental Branch Post Master (in short ''EDBPM') is involved and related to the same selection. Writ Petition No.49253 of 2002 has been filed against the subsequent consequential order. Both times, the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short ''Tribunal') has decided against the present petitioner.

Shri S.S. Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri D.V. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India have made claims and counter claims and advanced very long arguments regarding criteria for making appointment on the said post/agency. The arguments have been that the persons having sufficient immovable property as well as good education should be appointed. A similar controversy as is involved in the present petitions, has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 6628 of 2004 to which one of us (Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.), vide judgment dated 16.09.2005, placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suman Verma Vs. Union of India & Ors., (2004) 12 SCC 57 in which it has been held that a person having more marks in High School must be appointed provided the candidate has minimum level of property and income so that he has adequate means of livelihood apart from the ED allowances, decided that the person if fulfilled other conditions, possessed more marks in High School should be appointed. In the instant case, there is nothing on record to show that the other party did not have minimum required property. More so, the present petition is not working for the last three years, therefore, there is no occasion for this Court to alter the position at such a belated stage. Shri S.S. Tripathi, learned counsel for the present petitioner in both the petitions has fairly conceded that the said private respondent has better marks than present petition in High School.

In view of the above, we do not find any force in either of the petitions. They are accordingly dismissed.

19.10.2005

AHA


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.