Petitioner sought regularization of deputation services and quashing of an administrative order directing sympathetic consideration by the competent authority.
Directions to the Competent Authority to consider the petitioner's case for regularization sympathetically on a specified date.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Misc. Petition No 9)5$? . I O . ‘ ¢ 1 . 1993. Patimoner :«FAIZ MGHAI‘MAD Ulu OT“ S‘HPI IHGIIAI‘”“’ D Al‘v’IIN AGE} ABC‘UJ, ”$28 ynqrs , .Z/O Ccniihgent Dhily Iiqted ,As‘sistant. Pushh AIM? banyqptrw , Dulg w .-'.)r” \ R10 gubhash Nagar, Near'Gokul's .53ho p Burg Tghsil and Di.stt.mrg {ma}. 1 . General Manager, kashu Ahar banyan‘bra, fg mfg (i‘vi.’P.) i 1 .2 . managing Director, Piul‘i. Sigte Gan-operative Marketing Federation ,.Ltd. v Head Gffice- Jahangirabgd Bhopal § gecretary , We ‘lVl.P.State Ccwoperative Marke'tin g Fed era-ti 0n LtG. . Office- J'ghangirapad ,Bhopal, TITH‘N UWDE‘ iTlCL$ ' 2P6 M‘F 227__MWOT“ CONSI‘IWT‘TON,¢ u . OF INSIDE; *n . L‘ Oi" i$sue of writs in the mature of certiorari I n arms am; /9r an] ouhcm awroprl te W1 t 01“ d1r9cilon ‘50 unwrvVLou-f: (he Sal‘dS a
%~§E£w§"1 $GijR? €315: =..%駣§§f§% gig?“ J é: $1 ??§§€E§§1RR : E§§LIAE$F3§$F€
Hew’kaie $§1§i $ati§h K. Agwihmri d.
W §§ Na 22533 of ii§§3
$e‘iiéiar4e?
Faiz Mohammad
Versus
Reggonfmnm Genera! Manager. Pa$hu Aha? Sanyantra, Dung and ethers, Shn‘ HB. Agr vat Sr. Advccate with Shri Maniah AgrawaL ,AaxJacate for the peii‘tioner. Dy. XLK. shukla, Sr. Advaoate with Ms Rim Mishra, Advacaie f0; respcmdent Nu?
Shri Abhiehek Sénha, counseé for respondentS No. 2 & 3.
G R i} E R Wa'sgacian 'im Febmang, 25W}
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for regwarization of hie services
on the postofAesisiaht / Acosumtaht (how designated as Assistant Accounts Officer) with aii consequential benefits He has aiso prayed for affirming the order dared 10—04-2003 (Annexure P/6) by quashing the order dared 264342003 Annexure Pl? 2. Learned ooLinsei for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appeinted as a deny-wager and in this petition he has prayed for regularization of hie services. Learned oouneel further submits that ti e petitioner may be permitted to approach the Competent Authority / respondent Not for consideration of his ease sympathetically. 3. in View of the above, it is directed that the petitioner may appear before the Competent Authority! respondent No.1 on 28322607 and if he so appears the Competent Authority / respondent No1 is directed to consider the case of the petitionersympathetically! in accordance with law and circuiars,
V ‘ Sdlx Satish K. Agnihotri ; Judge
Li
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for regularization of his deputation services with consequential benefits.
Faiz Mohammad
General Manager, Passhu Ahar Sanyantra, Durg and others, Sr. H.B. Agarwal & Co.
Secretary, M.P. State Cooperative Marketing Federation Ltd.
Satish K. Agnihotri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
