HARI BANSH LAL versus SAHODAR PRASAD MAHTO AND ORS.

HARI BANSH LAL versus SAHODAR PRASAD MAHTO AND ORS.

PIL challenging appointment in service matters is not maintainable except for writ of quo warranto; appointment of appellant as Chairman was in accordance with statutory provisions; no prescribed age limit; allegations regarding integrity and age not substantiated; High Court's conclusion contrary to record; appellant entitled to continue as Chairman.

Parties
Appellant: Hari Bansh Lal; Respondent: Sahodar Prasad Mahto; Respondent: State Government of Jharkhand; Respondent: Jharkhand State Electricity Board
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Appointment of Chairman of State Electricity Board, Maintainability of PIL in Service Matters, Writ of Quo Warranto
Service Law Administrative Law Appointment of Chairman of State Electricity Board Maintainability of PIL in Service Matters Writ of Quo Warranto

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hari Bansh Lal

Appellant

Sahodar Prasad Mahto

Respondent

State Government of Jharkhand

Respondent

Jharkhand State Electricity Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether PIL challenging appointment of Chairman of State Electricity Board is maintainable in service matters
  2. 2 Whether appointment of appellant was arbitrary or contrary to statutory provisions
  3. 3 Whether age and alleged doubts about integrity disqualify the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

PIL challenging appointment in service matters is not maintainable except for writ of quo warranto; appointment of appellant as Chairman was in accordance with statutory provisions; no prescribed age limit; allegations regarding integrity and age not substantiated; High Court's conclusion contrary to record; appellant entitled to continue as Chairman.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment of High Court set aside
  • Appellant permitted to join duty forthwith and continue as Chairman of State Electricity Board