HARI NANDAN SHARAN BHATNAGAR versus S. N. DIXIT & ANR.
All officials of the U.P. Legislative Assembly Secretariat holding posts in the same scale of pay as Upper Division Assistants are eligible for promotion to the post of Superintendent, and selection among them is at the discretion of the appointing authority, with seniority being one factor but not a sole qualification.
- Parties
- Appellant: HARi NANDAN SHARAN BHATNAGAR; Respondent No. 1: S. N. DIXIT; Respondents: State of Uttar Pradesh, Speaker, Legislative Assembly of the State
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 25 April 1969
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From High Court (second Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Promotion Rules, Interpretation of Departmental Rules
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
HARi NANDAN SHARAN BHATNAGAR
Appellant
S. N. DIXIT
Respondent No. 1
State of Uttar Pradesh, Speaker, Legislative Assembly of the State
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From High Court (second Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether appointment to the post of Superintendent was contrary to Rule 7 of the United Provinces Legislative Department Rules
- 2 Whether 'grade of superior service assistants' includes all persons working on the same scale of pay
Ratio Decidendi
All officials of the U.P. Legislative Assembly Secretariat holding posts in the same scale of pay as Upper Division Assistants are eligible for promotion to the post of Superintendent, and selection among them is at the discretion of the appointing authority, with seniority being one factor but not a sole qualification.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- No order as to costs
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