Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GOPAL DUTT JOSHI versus DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION LKO. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Gopal Dutt Joshi v. Director Of Secondary Education Lko. And Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 1016 of 2001 [2005] RD-AH 7319 (12 December 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. 32

Special Appeal No. 1016 of 2001

          Gopal Dutt Joshi Vs. Director of Secondary Education & others.

                                                        *****

Hon'ble S. Rafat Alam, J.

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

This appeal under the Rules of the Court arises from the order of the Hon'ble Single Judge dated 8.9.1999 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38374 of 1999.

It appears that the petitioner-appellant filed the aforesaid writ petition for quashing the order of the Joint Director of Education, Kumayun Mandal,  Nainital dated 24.7.1999 whereby the representation of the petitioner-appellant preferred pursuant to this Court's order dated 24.10.1999 in Writ Petition No. 33717 of 1998 has been disposed of. By the aforesaid order which was impugned in the writ petition, difference of salary was ordered to be paid to the petitioner-appellant for the period 9.7.1993 to 5.3.1997. However, his claim for promotion to the post of Junior Clerk was rejected as he was not found suitable in the selection held in that regard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant sought to argue that the petitioner-appellant was working as Daftari and was asked to officiate as Junior Clerk and since the post of Junior Clerk is still vacant, he should have been considered for promotion.

We do not find any force in the submission for the reason that the Joint Director of Education has examined the matter in great detail and by a speaking order disposed the representation of the petitioner vide order dated 24.7.1999, from a perusal whereof it is apparent that the petitioner-appellant was not found suitable for giving promotion to the post of Junior Clerk. It further appears that for the period he has worked as officiating Junior Clerk, difference of salary was ordered to be paid. Thus, the petitioner-appellant having not been found suitable for such promotion, in our view, there is no reason to interfere with the order  of the Joint Director of Education. The Hon'ble Single Judge has, therefore, rightly dismissed the writ petition.

We do not find any merit in the appeal and it is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dated: 12.12.2005

SA


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.