In second appeal, the High Court held that an appeal by an employee seeking regularization of services retrospectively must fail where the employee failed to prove initial appointment against a sanctioned vacant post.
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.
1
RSA No.1249 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.1249 of 2011
Date of Decision: January 12, 2012
Kharaiti Lal
.......Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and another
.......Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA
Present: Mr.SP Chahar, Advocate for the appellant.
<><><>
TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.
The plaintiff-appellant is in second appeal having been unsuccessful in both the Courts below.
2
RSA No.1249 of 2011
RSA No.1249 of 2011 3
13.4.2007, Exhibit D5, has been noticed by the Courts below whereby the State Government had rescinded four notifications including the notification dated 1.10.2003, Exhibit P2, upon which the plaintiff-appellant is placing reliance to stake his claim for regularization w.e.f. 1.10.2003.
JANUARY 12, 2012 SRM
( TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA ) JUDGE
Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter? Yes/No
1 issue framed by the court
Whether regularization of services can be claimed retrospectively if the employee was not originally appointed against a vacant post.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kharaiti Lal
State of Haryana
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
