Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. RAJKUMARI PAL versus STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Rajkumari Pal v. State Of U.P. And Another - WRIT - A No. 57722 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 17878 (17 October 2006)

 

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. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.57722 of 2006

Smt. Raj Kmari Pal

Versus

State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla, J.

Petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to absorb the services of petitioner as staff nurse.

Brief background of the case, as mentioned in the writ petition is that petitioner was appointed staff nurse vide letter dated 18.08.1984, and her place of joining was Rajkiya Ayurveda College and Chikitsalaya, Jhansi. It has been contended that on account of certain personal problem, she could not join her duties, and thereafter on 16.01.1997, petitioner's husband made some correspondence qua her appointment, in response to which communication dated 22.02.1997 was issued by the Administrative Officer alleging therein that for appointment of petitioner, her educational certificates were required. Pursuant to the said letter, petitioner submitted her papers and thereafter no action has been taken, as such petitioner has approached this Court.  

Series of events, which have been mentioned, clearly reflect that petitioner was appointed way back in 1984, which opportunity she could not avail for certain problems of her own. Now after a gap of more than 20 years no direction can be issued in her favour for her absorption on the strength of the appointment made in the year 1984. Even if some communication had been sent on 22.02.1997, the same does not confer any right in favour of petitioner.

Writ petition lacks substance and is dismissed.  

17.10.2006

SRY


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.