Nath Sinha Vs. State of U.P. & Ors  INSC 791 (5 December 1995)
K.Ramaswamy, K.Faizan Uddin (J) Kirpal B.N. (J)
1996 SCC (1) 523 1995 SCALE (7)252
O R D
not necessary to go into the controversy raised in this appeal since the
contesting respondents have already retired by attaining superannuation. This
Court while granting leave and admitting the appeal stated thus:
quo pending disposal of the appeal as of today in the matter of reversion as a
consequence of the judgment of the High Court. Future Promotions will be
subject to the result of the appeal." In the judgment of the High Court in
first part in paragraph 46. it was stated thus:
would further like to clarify that any order that may be passed in these writ
petitions should not effect any confirmation or substantive Promotion made Prior
to the filing of the writ petitions." In the ultimate paragraph of the
judgment a contrary opinion was expressed stating that any action taken Prior
to November 29, 1979 was illegal.
stated by the appellant that on his Promotion as Executive Engineer on July 12, 1979 though initially on ad hoc basis,
he was confirmed and regularised as an Executive Engneer on June 30, 1980. The writ petition came No.2447 of
1980 came to be filed by V.N. Mittal on September 29, 1980.
view of the above facts and in view of the directions issued by this Court the
consequence would be that the status quo which the appellant had Prior to the
order passed by this Court, would continue. The rights accrued to the appellant
Prior to the date of the filing of the writ petition would continue to be
available to him, since his Promotion and confirmation as such was not quashed.
Government, therefore, would work out the rights of the appellant accordingly.
appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.