LUXMI DEVI versus THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
The Court found that the appellant had consistently outperformed and outpaced respondent No. 6 in all aspects of service and that her seniority must be maintained despite any temporary postings or deputations, given the arbitrary and illegal attempt to revert her in rank.
- Parties
- Appellant: Luxmi Devi; Respondents: The State of Haryana and Ors.
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 31 March 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.w.p. No. 19006 of 1995
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Seniority, Promotion, Confirmation in Service, Arbitrariness in Administrative Action
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Luxmi Devi
Appellant
The State of Haryana and Ors.
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.w.p. No. 19006 of 1995
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the seniority of the appellant over respondent No. 6 was to be maintained despite deputation and posting in different ranges?
- 2 Whether the action of reverting the appellant to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector after deputation was legal?
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the appellant had consistently outperformed and outpaced respondent No. 6 in all aspects of service and that her seniority must be maintained despite any temporary postings or deputations, given the arbitrary and illegal attempt to revert her in rank.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- The State is directed to continue to maintain the seniority of the appellant over the 6th respondent in the respective posts, recognizing her superior performance as all rounder.
- 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