(EX) CAPT. RANDHIR SINGH DHULL versus S. D. BHAMBRI & OTHERS
Petitioner was not substantively appointed as Tahsildar until January 3, 1978; only military service rendered during designated Emergency period and as commissioned/enrolled officer qualifies for seniority concession. No case was made out of discrimination since no other ex-army candidate was granted seniority from date of acceptance as candidate.
- Parties
- Petitioner: Ex-Capt. Randhir Singh Dhull; Respondents: S. D. Bhambri & Others
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 02 March 1981
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution / Final Decision (judgment)
- Outcome
- Petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Seniority Determination, Military Service Concession, Recruitment Procedures, Equality Under Constitution
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ex-Capt. Randhir Singh Dhull
Petitioner
S. D. Bhambri & Others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution / Final Decision (judgment)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether petitioner's military service should be tagged to civil service for the purpose of seniority, increments, promotion, pensions etc. under Punjab Emergency (Concession) Rules 1965
- 2 Whether denial of the claimed seniority benefit amounts to violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution
Ratio Decidendi
Petitioner was not substantively appointed as Tahsildar until January 3, 1978; only military service rendered during designated Emergency period and as commissioned/enrolled officer qualifies for seniority concession. No case was made out of discrimination since no other ex-army candidate was granted seniority from date of acceptance as candidate.
Court Disposition
Petition dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment