The High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against concurrent judgments dismissing his suit for declaration and permanent injunction regarding his recall from post. The court upheld the lower courts' finding that the appellant was appointed, not promoted, to the role.
Appellant's appeal dismissed; lower courts' judgments upheld.
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.
RSA No.3171 of 2009
-2-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.3171 of 2009 Decided on : 09.09.2009
Baldev Singh
... Appellant
versus
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar & another
...Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present : Mr. A.K. Vermani, Advocate for the appellant.
AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL)
This appeal has been filed against the concurrent judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellant for declaring that the order dated 24.08.2006 recalling him from the post of Professional Assistant (Library) at the Regional Center, Gurdaspur to the post of Restorer, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar as illegal and for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from recalling him under the said order. The following questions have been proposed:
i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the ld. Courts have totally misread the evidence lead by the present appellant?
ii)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the ld. Courts below have wrongly
-2-
RSA No.3171 of 2009
come to the conclusion that he present appellant was merely appointed to post of Professional Assistant and not promoted as such?
iii)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the impugned judgments and decrees passed by the ld. Courts below are legally sustainable in the eyes of law?
All the questions are pure questions of fact. Learned counsel has referred me to Ex.D-4 where under he claims that when he was appointed as Professional Assistant , it was by way of promotion. Both the Courts below have considered this document and have rightly come to the conclusion that it nowhere suggests that the post was filled up by way of promotion.
I have not been able to persuade myself that the interpretation of the Courts below suffers from any infirmity. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed.
September 09, 2009 ( AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant was promoted to the post of Professional Assistant or merely appointed?
Whether the impugned judgments and decrees are legally sustainable?
Whether the appreciation of evidence by the Courts below is correct regarding the nature of appointment?
Baldev Singh
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
Ajay Tewari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
