BAJRANG LAL SHARMA versus C. K. MATHEW AND ORS.

BAJRANG LAL SHARMA versus C. K. MATHEW AND ORS.

The Notification dated 11.09.2011 was issued in exercise of the powers of the concerned authorities and was not found to be contumacious or in contempt of this Court’s directions; challenges to the notification and to the Bhatnagar Committee report are substantive matters for the High Court to decide in accordance with law (and in light of Jarnail Singh), and therefore the contempt petitions are to be closed.

Parties
Petitioner: Bajrang Lal Sharma; Respondent: C. K. Mathew and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Contempt Petition (civil) / Inherent Jurisdiction; Petitions Filed for Non Compliance of the Order Dated 29.08.2012
Outcome
Contempt petitions closed.
Legal Topics
Reservation in Promotion, Consequential Seniority, Quantifiable Data Requirement, Bhatnagar Committee Report, Compliance With Supreme Court Directions, Recovery of Seniority (catch Up Rule)
Contempt of Court Constitutional Law Administrative Law Labour and Service Law Reservation Law Reservation in Promotion Consequential Seniority Quantifiable Data Requirement +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bajrang Lal Sharma

Petitioner

C. K. Mathew and others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Petition (civil) / Inherent Jurisdiction; Petitions Filed for Non Compliance of the Order Dated 29.08.2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Notification dated 11.09.2011 amounted to contempt of this Court’s directions
  2. 2 Whether the State was bound to collect quantifiable data before providing reservation in promotion and consequential seniority
  3. 3 Whether notifications granting consequential seniority could be quashed for non-compliance with M. Nagaraj and Suraj Bhan Meena

Ratio Decidendi

The Notification dated 11.09.2011 was issued in exercise of the powers of the concerned authorities and was not found to be contumacious or in contempt of this Court’s directions; challenges to the notification and to the Bhatnagar Committee report are substantive matters for the High Court to decide in accordance with law (and in light of Jarnail Singh), and therefore the contempt petitions are to be closed.

Court Disposition

Contempt petitions closed.

Orders

  • Contempt petitions are directed to be closed.
  • High Court requested to consider and dispose of substantive matters challenging Notification dated 11.09.2011 and the Bhatnagar Committee recommendations preferably within six months from the date of this order.