REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Sudhir Arjunrao Bansode Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

D S NAKARA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. PRAMOD BHARTIYA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. TILAK RAJ [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. CHARANJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
AVAS VIKAS SANSTHAN VS. AVAS VIKAS SANSTHAN ENGINEERS ASSN [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. UMADEVI [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA PRASAD TEWARI VS. UTTAR PRADESH RAJYA KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI PARISHAD [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. M L KESARI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. DAYA LAL [REFERRED TO]
MARATHWADA SARVASHRAMIK SANGATHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
NIHAL SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
SACHIN AMBADAS DAWALE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
NAND KUMAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RAM NARESH RAWAT VS. SRI ASHWINI RAY & ORS. [REFERRED TO]
SHEO NARAIN NAGAR AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
MADHUKAR S/O BHAVANRAO SADGIR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties heard both sides finally at the admission stage.

(2.) The petitioners are Special Assistant Public Prosecutors (for the sake of brevity and convenience hereinafter referred as to the "Spl. A.P.Ps.") soliciting directions for regularization of their services, parity in pay scales, service benefits and claiming protection of their services from any adverse action. There are common questions of law and facts involved in these petitions, therefore, we propose to decide them by this common judgment and order. Writ Petition No. 3084 of 2016 and Writ Petition No. 9850 of 2017 are treated to be lead petitions.

(3.) Following tabular chart is useful to disclose the nature of the proceedings at a glance :

Click here to view full judgment.

SUDHIR ARJUNRAO BANSODE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address