✦ Bombay High Court · 23 Aug 2004

Judgment · High Court · 2004

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 22. The order of the Tribunal in the operative part reads thus: We, therefore, respondents a DPC consider applicant arising 20-10-1993. The DPC consider record, etc. rules, accordingly
  • Para 33. date. should applicant promotion, 20-10-1993 benefits." promoted w.e.f. provided consequential All Tribunal therefore direct consideration petitioner promotion liable considered 20-10-1993. While observing Tribunal categorically respondent should holding DPC DPC considered records etc. applicant promotion applicant 20-10-19993. It therefore effect directing consideration a particular The…

Judgment

challenged the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal as illegal and improper.

#2. The order of the Tribunal in the operative part reads thus: We, therefore, respondents a DPC consider applicant arising 20-10-1993. The DPC consider record, etc. rules, accordingly

#3. date. should applicant promotion, 20-10-1993 benefits." promoted w.e.f. provided consequential All Tribunal therefore direct consideration petitioner promotion liable considered 20-10-1993. While observing Tribunal categorically respondent should holding DPC DPC considered records etc. applicant promotion applicant 20-10-19993. It therefore effect directing consideration a particular The exercise consideration undertaken respondent without injury them. While framed purpose operative time, consideration directed made. In opinion factual position, need to interfere with the order of Tribunal. The petition is accordingly dismissed. ....

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Civil Petition No. 160 of 2002). ← Search more judgments