Querry about Hon'ble Suprement Court Judgement dated 09.02.2011 in the case of Mamta Vs. State of Or
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 17 February 2011
This query is : Open
Please suggest me that whether the Supreme court Judgement dated 09.02.2011 in the case of Mamta Vs. State of Orissa reg. 'If any appointment is made by merely inviting names from the Employment Exchange or putting a note on the Notice Board, that will not meet the requirement of Articles 14 and 16 (equality clause) of the Constitution' is applicable by perusing my following questions -
(1) Is this Judgement applicable retrospectively to the cases where a competitive exam of shorthand and typing held with the candidates sponsored by Employment Exchange or this judgement will be applicable for prospective/future cases only.
(2) I was appointed as stenographer grade 'd' initially in a project by competing 12 candidates sponsored by employment exchange and this test was taken by Director (Education) M/o of HRD. Later on after winding up of the project I was transferred to the one of the regular division of the same ministry. I was getting all regular employees benefits like CPF, Part Final withdrawl with gratuity rules of the institution, LTC (since inception) implementation of 5th and 6th pay commission report and arrears to this effect were also paid to me.
(4) In my initial appointment letter's Terms and Conditions it is clearly shown that 'he will not leave this organisation without the proper approval of this organisation', 'he will will be on the pay scale and will be paid salary at par with the other employees of the main regular organisation, police verification, medical from govt. hospital done;
(3) Am I not qualified stenographer after clearing the competitive exam which was given alongwith the candidates of Employment Exchange ?
(4) I was shown in writing that I was working in the main organisation(regular) against vacant post
Please advise me at the earliest please.
