REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Sandhyarani Sahoo Appellant

V/S

DISTRICT JUDGE Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. V. ISHWAR SINGH KHATRI AND ORS [REFERRED TO]
NIRMALA ANAND V. ADVENT CORPORATION (P) LTD. AND ORS [REFERRED TO]
MAKHANLAL WAZA VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
GENERAL MANAGER SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY SECUNDERABAD VS. A V R SIDDHANTTI [REFERRED TO]
A JANARDHANA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PRABODH VERMA DAL CHAND VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. SECRETARIAT ASSISTANT SUCCESSFUL EXAMINEES UNION [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE DY EXECUTIVE ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR VS. CHAIRMAN BANKING SERVICE RECRUITMENT BOARD [REFERRED TO]
J JOSE DHANAPAUL VS. S THOMAS [REFERRED TO]
PREM SINGH VS. HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA VS. S SATYAM [REFERRED TO]
SURINDERSINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
ARUN TEWARI VS. ZILA MANSAVI SHIKSHAK SANGH [REFERRED TO]
AZHAR HASAN VS. DISTT JUDGE SAHARANPUR [REFERRED TO]
KAMLESH KUMAR SHARMA VS. YOGESH KUMAR GUPTA [REFERRED TO]
RAM SWARUP VS. S N MAIRA [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDRA S HOODA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
L CHANDRAKISHORE SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD RIAZUL USMAN GANI VS. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE NAGPUR [REFERRED TO]
KANT TRIPATHI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. RAGHBIR CHAND SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
M P RAJYA SAHKARI BANK MARYADI VS. INDIAN COFFEE WORKERS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
RAMRAO VS. ALL INDIA BACKWARD CLASS BANK EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. RAJKUMAR SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
INDU SHEKHAR SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
U P GRAM PANCHAYAT ADHIKARI SANGH VS. DAYA RAM SAROJ [REFERRED TO]
GOVT OF A P VS. G JAYA PRASAD RAO [REFERRED TO]
RAM AVTAR PATWARI VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MUKUL SAIKIA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition has been filed few seeking a Dr. B.S. Chauhan, C.J. V direction to the Opposite Parties for appointing her as a Stenographer III the judgeship of Balasore against the quota reserved for women.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that on 4th March, 1997 an advertisement was made for filling up five existing vacancies of Junior Stenographers and One vacancy which was likely to occur in near future. Petitioner applied and appeared in the test. However, her name found place at serial Nos. 10 in the merit list. The appointment was made strictly on the basis of merit. Petitioner's grievance is that since she belongs to the general category (women), she should have been offered the appointment in reserved category. Hence this petition.

(3.) HOWEVER , Mr. Swain, Learned Additional Government Advocate has submitted that not a single successful candidate had been impleaded and subsequent to the selection of 1997 further selection to the post of Junior Stenographer could have been held and therefore, at this stage no relief can be granted to the Petitioner and for non -impleading of necessary parties the writ petition is not maintainable. Petitioner is now 39 years of age. She cannot be offered appointment. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

Click here to view full judgment.

SANDHYARANI SAHOO Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address