REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

MAHESH RAJAK Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

FEDERAL STATE SCHOOL TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA V. THE STATE OF VICTORIA [REFERRED TO]
VERISIMO VASQUEZ VILAS V. CITY OF MANILA. [REFERRED TO]
COOMBER V. JUSTICES OF BERKS. [REFERRED TO]
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD V. INDIAN ALUMINIUM CO. [REFERRED TO]
SHIRE COUNCIL EMPLOYEES' UNION OF AUSTRALIA V. MELBORUNE CORPORATION. [REFERRED TO]
D N BANERJI VS. P R MUKHERJEE [REFERRED TO]
A S KRISHNA VS. STATE OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
PREM NATH KAUL FOR SELF AND ON BEHALF OF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE KASHMIR AGRICULTURISTS ASSOCIATION SRINAGAR VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. HOSPITAL MAZDOOR SABHA [REFERRED TO]
CORPORATION OF CITY OF NAGPUR CORPORATION OF CITY OF NAGPUR CITY OF NAGPUR CORPORATION VS. ITS EMPLOYEES:FULSING MISTRY:N H MAJUMDAR [REFERRED TO]
RAI SHIVENDRA BAHADUR VS. GOVERNING BODY OF THE NALANDA COLLEGE BIHAR SHARIF [REFERRED TO]
BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD VS. A.RAJAPPA [REFERRED TO]
M KARUNANIDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
H D SINGH VS. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
DES RAJ VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
GRIH KALYAN KENDRA WORKERS UNION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
N NAGENDRA RAO AND COMPANY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS VS. JAGANNATH MARUTI KONDHARE [REFERRED TO]
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE VS. ASHOK HARIKUNI [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. UMADEVI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. RAM PRAKASH SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER P W D VS. DEV PRAKASH SHRIVAS [REFERRED TO]
M P RAJYA VAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED BALAGHAT VS. Q M QURESHI ENGLISH COACHING CLASS [REFERRED TO]
VISHNU VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BADRI VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
Vandna Singh VS. Steel Authority of India Ltd. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated 24.10.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.7062 of 2011 (S).

(2.) The appellant was engaged in the forest department on daily wage basis in the year 1981. He had been paid salary on monthly basis. As per appellant, he had been performing the work of Chowkidar and Coupe Guard. Appellant retired from service after completing 30 years of service. The appellant challenged the aforesaid order of retirement in a writ petition contending that he is eligible to continue in service up to the age of 58 years in accordance with clause 14-A of Standard Standing Orders (hereinafter called the "SSO"). Hence, his retirement after completing 30 years of service is arbitrary and illegal.

(3.) The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition after holding that the appellant was working as a daily wager and there were no rules in the department in regard to daily wager employees, hence, appellant has no legal right to continue in service up to the particular age.

Click here to view full judgment.

MAHESH RAJAK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address