Supreme Court of India
RAJPAL versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. on 20 November 1995
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
RAJPAL v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
A
NOVEMBER 20, 1995 [K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]
B
Service Law:
Regulmisation-Similarly situated persons already regularised-Appel-lant to be taken into se1vice and regularised-However, he will not be entitled C to back wages but shall get all other consequential benefits.
In this appeal against the High Court's order, the appellant prayed for regularisation.
Allowing the appeal, this Court
D
HELD : 1. Since the persons similarly situated were admittedly taken into service and their services have been regularised, the appellant, who is the only person left out in the field, also stands in the same position. On this special circumstances, he is also entitled to the same relief. [482-B]
E
2. The respondents are directed to take the appellant int9 service within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. But the appellant would not be entitled to the back-wages; he would, however, get all other consequential benefits. [ 482-C)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 11401 of F 1995.
From the Judgment and Order dated 8.9.92 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in RS.A. No. 1065 of 1992.
S.M. Hooda, Mahinder Singh Dahiya for the Appellant. G
Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal and Ms. lndu Malhotra for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Delay condoned.
H
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 5 S.C.R.
A Leave granted.
In view of the order passed by this Court in S.L.P. (C) Nos. 3099-3100/85 & batch, the persons similarly situated were admittedly taken into service and their services have been regularised. Under these circumstan-ces, since the appellant, who is the only person left out in the field, also B stands in the same position, we think, on this special circumstances, he is also entitled to the same relief.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. But the appellant would not be entitled to the back-wages; he would, however, get all other consequential C benefits. The respondents are directed to take the appellant into service within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order.
G.N.
Appeal allowed.