REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PURSHOTTAM DASS GUPTA Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

U.P.JAL NIGAM V. S.C.ATRI AND ANOTHER [REFERRED]
R.C. SOOD V..HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. V. PRATAPSINGH DAYAL SINGH RAJPUT [REFERRED]
R.C. SOOD V. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT RAJASTHAN AND ORS. [REFERRED]
SUKHDEV SINGH THE OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION THE L 1 C LIMITED THE INDUSTRIAL FINANCE CORPN EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION VS. BHAGATRAM SARDAR SINGH RAGHUVANSHI:THE ASSOCIATION OF CLASS II OFFICERS 0 N G C:SHYAM LAL SHARMA:THE INDUSTRIAL FINANCE CORPN [REFERRED]
MANEKA GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
MANAGER GOVERNMENT BRANCH PRESS VS. D B BELLIAPPA [REFERRED]
MANAGING DIRECTOR UTTAR PRADESH WAREHOUSING CORPORATION VS. VIJAY NARAYAN VAJPAYEE [REFERRED]
A L KALRA VS. PROJECT AND EQUIPMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED]
WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL LIMITED VS. HINDUSTAN STEEL LIMITED [REFERRED]
WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. DESH BANDHU GHOSH [REFERRED]
OLGA TELLIS VAYYAPVRI KUPPUSAMI VS. BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION:STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA BISWAROOP CHATTERJEE ACHINTA KUMAR BISWAS NABENDU BOSE LAXMI NARAYAN VS. TULSIRAM PATEL:SADANAND JHA:G P KOUSHAL:UNION OF INDIA:STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED]
CENTRAL INLAND WATER TRANSPORT CORPORATION LIMITED VS. BROJO NATH GANGULY / TARUN KANTI SENGUPTA [REFERRED]
O P BHANDARI VS. INDIAN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPN LIMITED [REFERRED]
N C DALWADI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED]
DAILY RATED CASUAL LABOUR EMPLOYED UNDER PANDT DEPARTMENT VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
M K AGARWAL VS. GURGAON GRAMIN BANK [REFERRED]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. D T C MAZDOOR CONGRESS ANB [REFERRED 1990 3 JT 725]
H C PUTTASWAMY VS. HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BANGALORE [REFERRED]
POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS BOARD VS. C S N MURTHY [REFERRED]
K P TIWARI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED]
S RAMACHANDRARAJU VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED]
U P JAL NIGAM VS. PRABHAT CHANDRA JAIN [REFERRED 1996 1 JT 641]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. KASHINATH KHER [REFERRED JT 1996(2) SC 569==AIR 1996 SC 1328]
SUKHDEO VS. COMMISSIONER AMRAVATI DIVISION AMRAVATI ANOTHER [REFERRED]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. YAMUNA SHANKER MISRA [REFERRED]
M S BINDRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA VS. ISHWAR CHAND JAIN [REFERRED]
High Court of M.P. VS. R.C. Chandal [REFERRED]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the adverse remarks made by the High Court for the years 1994 and 1995 at one go and seeking promotion from the date on which his juniors were promoted to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service. The facts have to be stated in some detail in view of the circumstances under which the petitioner's case has been dealt with by the High Court. The petitioner joined Delhi Judicial Service on 28.1.1978. He was put on selection grade of Rs. 3700-5000 in June, 1993 w.e.f. 31.5.1991 as he has been having good service record. The petitioner was assigned with the work of Addl. Rent Controller for the period from 22.3.1992 to 24.8.1995by the High Court. By order dated 8.6.1993 the petitioner was entrusted financial powers by the learned District Judge. The order reads as under:

(2.) On 18.5.1996 one of the items for consideration by the Full Court was selection of officers for promotion to Delhi Higher Judicial Service. For that purpose, though that was not on the Agenda, ACRs of 23 officers were recorded by the Full Court. For the petitioner, for the years 1994 and 1995 adverse remarks 'C integrity doubtful' were recorded at one go. Thereupon the Full Court considered the officers for promotion and the petitioner was superseded. On 27.5.1996 a communication was sent from the High Court to the petitioner informing him about the adverse remarks and the same reads as under:

(3.) It may be noted at the stage that in the note put up by the office on 25.2.1997 for the 4 member committee, reference is made to the Memorandums mentioned in the above communication. This aspect I shall be be dealing with presently.

Click here to view full judgment.

PURSHOTTAM DASS GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address