This order disposed of a writ petition challenging the denial of a promoted payscale by relying on a prior judgment from the same court regarding the matter.
null
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.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 456 of 2023
Ram Gopal Bhatt and others ……….....Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others ………..Respondents
Present:-
Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Pooran Singh Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
By means of the instant petition, the
petitioners seek the following reliefs:-
2
petition, along with arrears and admissible interest.
3
given by the learned State counsel.
Sanjay
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Deep Chandra BadhaniApplied¶6
Writ Petition (S/S) No.602 of 2014, Deep Chandra Badhani and others vs. State of Uttarakhand and others & connected matters on 11.04.2017
Ram Gopal Bhatt and others
State of Uttarakhand and others
Ravindra Maithani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
