Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of the above, this miscellaneous application is disposed of by c
Judgment
Heard Ms. P Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/Sta te. Also heard Mr. PK Bora, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party/wri t petitioner. The applicant submitted that due to the interim order passed by this Cou rt on 15.02.2010, they are unable to make any appointment to the post of CDPO wh ich were advertised on 12.01.2010. A plain reading of the Court’s interim order dated 15.02.2010 shows that the State is not restraint from making any appointment in pursuant to the adver tisement dated 12.01.2010. However, appointments had been made subject to final outcome of the writ petition. In view of the above, this miscellaneous application is disposed of by c larifying that no embargo is placed on the State to proceed with the appointment in pursuant to the advertisement dated 12.01.2010. However, if any appointment is made, the same shall abide by the result of the writ petition.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.