Skip to content


Baijnath Ram Goenka Vs. Nand Kumar Singh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1913)15BOMLR500
AppellantBaijnath Ram Goenka
RespondentNand Kumar Singh
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
.....6 & 10: [s.b. mhase, a.p. deshpande & p.b. varale, jj] caste certificate petitioner seeking appointment against the post reserved for member of schedule tribe his caste certificate was invalidated subsequently held, his appointment would not be protected. the observations/directions issued by supreme court in para 36 of judgment in the case of state v millind reported in 2001 91) mah. lj sc 1 is not the law declared by supreme court under article 141 of the constitution of india. said observations/directions are issued in exercise of powers under article 142 of the constitution and also have no application to the cases relating to appointments and are restricted to the cases relating to admissions. the protection, if any, to be granted in the fact and circumstances of case would.....atkinson, j.1. their lordships are clearly of opinion that the order of the 23rd of march 1900 was final and conclusive, and that, so far as the commissioner was concerned, he had no power to review that order in the way in which he has reviewed it. that is the only point in the case. they will humbly advise his majesty that the appeal ought to be dismissed.2. the appellant must pay the costs.
Judgment:

Atkinson, J.

1. Their Lordships are clearly of opinion that the Order of the 23rd of March 1900 was final and conclusive, and that, so far as the Commissioner was concerned, he had no power to review that Order in the way in which he has reviewed it. That is the only point in the case. They will humbly advise His Majesty that the appeal ought to be dismissed.

2. The appellant must pay the costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //