REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

M. NAKRO Appellant

V/S

STATE OF NAGALAND Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

R. S. MAKASHI VS. J. M. MENON [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. P K ROY [REFERRED TO]
WING COMMANDER J KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
K MADHAVAN DWARKA NATH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH SLJSHIL KLJMAR SRIVASTAVA D P SHUKLA CHANDRA PRAKASH AGGARWAL SUSHILCHAND SRIVASTAVA R P LAVANIA P N PARASHAR VS. RAFIQUDDIN:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA R C ROUT BINAYAK PANDA H C PRUSTY VS. SUKANTI MOHAPATRA:SUKANTI MOHAPATRA:RABINARAYAN MALL:STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION VS. JAGJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
K ANJAIAH VS. K CHANDRAIAH [REFERRED TO]
S I ROOPLAL VS. LT GOVERNOR [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. UMADEVI [REFERRED TO]
INDU SHEKHAR SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
ARUN KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ATTAR SINGH KAUSHIK VS. SECRETARY COMMR TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT [REFERRED TO]
HUGIE ZELIANG VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Before we deal with this appeal on merit, certain facts, which were relevant and not in dispute in W. P. (C) No. 30 (K)/2006, are set out as under :

(2.) Claiming that his 'absorption' in the Department of Power was legal and ought to have been counted w.e.f.06.10.1993, (i.e. the date of his joining the parent department, as a Lecturer), respondent No. 6 has, now, preferred this appeal.

(3.) We have heard Mr. B. N. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Mr. C. T. Jamir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Private respondents. We have also heard Mr. L. S. Jamir, learned Senior Govt. Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State respondents.

Click here to view full judgment.

M NAKRO Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address