GANGARAM versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

GANGARAM versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Sub-rule (2-A) of Rule 68 permits acquisition of the license within three months from appointment, so the appellant's subsequent acquisition amounts to valid compliance; setting aside his appointment was erroneous.

Parties
Appellant: Gangaram; Respondent: State of Rajasthan; Third Respondent: Third respondent
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Appointment Qualification, Compliance With Statutory Rules, Rajasthan Cinemas (regulation) Rules, 1959
Employment Law Administrative Law Appointment Qualification Compliance With Statutory Rules Rajasthan Cinemas (regulation) Rules, 1959

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gangaram

Appellant

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Third respondent

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether possession of a cinema operator's license is required at the date of appointment or can be acquired post-appointment as per Rule 68(2-A) of Rajasthan Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1959

Ratio Decidendi

Sub-rule (2-A) of Rule 68 permits acquisition of the license within three months from appointment, so the appellant's subsequent acquisition amounts to valid compliance; setting aside his appointment was erroneous.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of High Court (Division Bench) set aside
  • Writ petition filed by third respondent dismissed