REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Shikha Abrol Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U. P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

DR. VISHWAJEET SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
HEERA LAL AND OTHERS V. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
NETRAPAL SINGH VS. CHANDRA PAL SINGH AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
BISHAMBHAR DAYAL CHANDRA MOHAN JAGDISH PRASAD AGARWAL HARYANA DALL INDUSTRIES KALYANMAL DEEP CHAND AGGARWAL TRADING COMPANY ATTAR SINGH SANTOSH KUMAR J B FLOUR MILLS ANNUPCHAND SHYAMLAL K VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAKESH KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
SWAPAN KUMAR PAL VS. SAMITABHAR CHOKRABORTY [REFERRED TO]
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH THRU REGISTRAR VS. SATYA NARAYAN JHAVAR [REFERRED TO]
KHET SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
LAXMINARAYAN R BHATTAD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
JOHN VALLAMATTOM VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PUNIT RAI VS. DINESH CHAUDHARY [REFERRED TO]
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. JOGINDER S MONGA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. NAVEEN JINDAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. CHANDRAMOHANAN [REFERRED TO]
RAJINDER SINGH CHAUHAN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL FERTILIZER LTD VS. SOMVIR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
R S GARG VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
R B DIXIT VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HEERA LAL VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
HEERA LAL VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
VANDANA GANGWAR VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
Vinod Kumar VS. State of U.P. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. L.P. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Naveen Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned ACSC for respondent No.1 and Sri Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dtd. 22/6/2002 passed by respondent No.2 contained as Annexure-1 to the writ petition with further prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in service in the establishment of respondents as Stenographer with all service benefits notwithdstanding the impugned order dtd. 22/6/2002.

(3.) Factual matrix of the case is that a communication was made to the District Employment Exchange, Lucknow for making the names of eligible candidates on the post of Stenographer in the establishment of Directorate of Sainik Kalyan Evam Punerwas, U.P., Lucknow and the candidature was sought from district level offices i.e. Zila Sainik Kalyan Evam Punerwas Offices.

Click here to view full judgment.

SHIKHA ABROL Vs. STATE OF U. P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address