REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

SHYAMA DEVI Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

UNION OF INDIA VS. BHAGWAN [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ANR. VS. B. KISHORE [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR MMTC LIMITED NEW DELHI VS. PRAMODA DEI ALIAS NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. NARESH TANWAR [REFERRED TO]
S MOHAN VS. GOVERNMENT OF T N [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. PARASNATH [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION SECONDARY VS. PUSHPENDRA KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. KRISHNA DEVI [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. ASHWINI KUMAR TANEJA [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HYDROELECTRIC POWER CORPN VS. NANAK CHAND [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR VS. SAJAD AHMED MIR [REFERRED TO]
I G KARMIK VS. PRAHALAD MANI TRIPATHI [REFERRED TO]
MUMTAZ YUNUS MULANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
ESTERN COALFIELD LTD VS. ANIL BADYAKAR [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH KUMAR DUBEY VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
MADHULIKA PATHAK VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Jaswant Rai, Advocate holding brief of Sri H.C. Dubey, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for State of U.P.

(2.) This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by petitioners against judgement and order dated 20.03.2008 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in Original Application (hereinafter referred to as "OA") No. 866 of 2005 whereby Tribunal has rejected OA and declined to interfere with order dated 13.05.2005 passed by respondent-3 rejecting claim of petitioners for compassionate appointment.

(3.) The claim of petitioners for compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that petitioner-2 could get lessor marks as per scheme under different heads considered to examine which candidate is in more penurious condition in comparison to other candidates available for compassionate appointment who have already applied prior to petitioners. Further that petitioner-2 was not found in more penurious condition comparing to other candidates. Computation of marks of petitioner-2 has been shown in para-5 of impugned order dated 13.05.2005 passed by respondent-3 which reads as under:-

Click here to view full judgment.

SHYAMA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address