PHOOL SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2021-8-11
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on
August 04,2021
PHOOL SINGH
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
MOTI RAM DEKA SUDHIR KUMAR DAS PRIYA GUPTA MOTI RAM DEKA TIRATH RAM LAKHANPAL UNION OF INDIA HARI KISHORE RAM CHANDRA LAL RAM DUTTA UPADHYA ONKAR NATH AKHAURIA VS. GENERAL MANAGER NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY:GENERAL MANAGER NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY:GENERAL MANAGER NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY:GENERAL MANAGER NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY:UNION OF INDIA:S B TEWARI:PARIMAL GUPTA:PREMCHAND THAKUR:S B TEW [REFERRED TO]UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA BISWAROOP CHATTERJEE ACHINTA KUMAR BISWAS NABENDU BOSE LAXMI NARAYAN VS. TULSIRAM PATEL:SADANAND JHA:G P KOUSHAL:UNION OF INDIA:STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL INLAND WATER TRANSPORT CORPORATION LIMITED VS. BROJO NATH GANGULY / TARUN KANTI SENGUPTA [REFERRED TO]
DWARKADAS MARFATIA AND SONS VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. D T C MAZDOOR CONGRESS ANB [REFERRED TO]
OM NARAIN AGARWAL BASHIRAN VS. NAGAR PALIKA SHAHJAHANPUR:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PADMASUNDARA RAO DEAD VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
TEXTILE LABOUR ASSOCIATION VS. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SHARDINDU [REFERRED TO]
B P SINGHAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
DR.S.N.PATHAK,J. -
(1.)Heard the parties.
(2.)Despite valid service of notice, respondent No. 6 has chosen not to appear before this court either himself or through a counsel to place his case; hence, this Court proceeded to pass final order after hearing counsel for the rest of parties on the basis of merits of the case.
(3.)Petitioner has prayed for quashing the memo dated 03.09.2020 (Annexure-7), whereby the respondent no. 4 has illegally and arbitrarily terminated the remaining tenure of the petitioner and has removed him from the post of Vice-Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council. Petitioner has further prayed that after quashment of the said memo, the respondents may be directed to reinstate him on his post with all consequential benefits. It has been further prayed for quashing the notification dated 03.09.2020 (Annexure-8), whereby the respondent no. 4 has arbitrarily appointed respondent No. 6 as the new Vice-Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council for a period of three years.
(2.)Despite valid service of notice, respondent No. 6 has chosen not to appear before this court either himself or through a counsel to place his case; hence, this Court proceeded to pass final order after hearing counsel for the rest of parties on the basis of merits of the case.
(3.)Petitioner has prayed for quashing the memo dated 03.09.2020 (Annexure-7), whereby the respondent no. 4 has illegally and arbitrarily terminated the remaining tenure of the petitioner and has removed him from the post of Vice-Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council. Petitioner has further prayed that after quashment of the said memo, the respondents may be directed to reinstate him on his post with all consequential benefits. It has been further prayed for quashing the notification dated 03.09.2020 (Annexure-8), whereby the respondent no. 4 has arbitrarily appointed respondent No. 6 as the new Vice-Chairman, Jharkhand Academic Council for a period of three years.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.