Legal Documents Library

Sat appointment interview only

to employment exchange

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

OA No:_____ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the TN Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned action of the respondents whereby they are not permitting the applicant to appear in the interview to be held on __ for the post of __ and the applicant is also aggrieved by the action of the respondent Employment Exchange whereby they have not sponsored the name of the applicant for the above post despite the fact that juniors to the applicant have been sponsored.

The said impugned action is arbitrary, illegal, malafide, violative of the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitutional Rights and natural justice and issued in colourable exercise of power.

4. Jurisdiction:

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

1. That the applicant submits that ____

GROUNDS

2. That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and

Sat appoint selection 100 per cent reserve

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

 

OA No.:______ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order of the respondents whereby they have selected and appointed the respondent No. ________________ as Para Teacher Primary for GPS ___________.

4. Jurisdiction

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

6.1 That the applicant submits that he has applied for the post of Para Teacher Primary in Govt Pry School _____________, under Block Primary Education Officer _______ and under Gram Panchayat __. The applicant also belongs to the same Gram Panchayat.

6.2 The applicant possesses the following qualifications and certificates which were duly annexed along with the application and the last date of submissions of application was _____:-

- Matriculation __% marks A-__

- Plus Two __% marks A-__

- BA __% marks A-__

- MA __%marks A-__

- B. Ed. __% marks A-__

- SC A-__

- ST A-__

- OBC A-__

- Handicap A-__

- Widow A-__

- Land Donation A-__

- Ex-Servicemen A-__

- IRDP A-__

6.3 That the interview for the said posts were held at ____ on ____ in which the applicant along with the respondent No. ____ and other candidates participated. ____

6.4 That the marks are to be allocated in the manner prescribed in the Vidya Upasak Yojna, as per which the applicant viz-a-viz Respondent No. ____ scores the marks as follows:-

S.No. Qualification Applicant Respondent

- Plus Two __ __

(50) (for __% marks) (For __% marks)

- BA & above __ __

(10)

(One Year Teaching Course)

(5)

- SC/ST/OBC __ __

(5)

- Handicap/Widow/ESM __ __

(5)

- IRDP __ __

(5)

- Un-employed __ __

(5)

- Marks in Viva __ __

(15)

Total Marks __ __

6.5 That from above it is amply evident that the applicant scored more marks than the respondent No. __ due to higher academic qualifications and standard. However, there are 15 marks for viva which are to be given by the Chairman and the members (------------------------).

6.6 That _____

GROUNDS

6.7 That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide,

Sat appoint promotion contact

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

 

O. A. NO :______ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the T.N. Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order issued by the respondents where by they have replaced the services of the applicant as contract teacher by transferring another teacher on promotion vide Annexure A-__________, which is against the decision laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court and this Hon'ble court in catena of cases that the contract teachers can be replaced only by regularly appointed new hands through the Commission against the same vacancy.

4. Jurisdiction:

That the applicant declares that the subject matter of the order against which he wants redressal is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation prescribed in section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

6. Facts of the Case:

(6.1) That the applicant submits that he was initially engaged as a contract teacher against the sanctioned vacant post at Govt. Sr. Sec. School ___________ wef ___________ (A-1). The said contract was valid upto _______________ and renewable on the termination of the said contract.

(6.2) That it is submitted that the post against which the applicant was initially engaged is still vacant as no regular hand on fresh appointment through commission has joined as yet. The applicant was working in the winter/summer ___________________ closing school. It is also submitted that the applicant is also not being paid salary for the vacations/holidays/fictional breaks.

(6.3) That it is also submitted that the appointment of the applicant against the said post was through a proper procedure and the applicant fulfilled all the conditions and minimum requisite qualification for the said post in accordance with the R&P Rules. The qualification of the applicant is _______________, which is the minimum requisite qualification for the said post.

(6.4) That the Full Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal has adjudicated upon the matter on __________ as regards replacement of the contract teachers in the OA No. ______________ titled as Vijay Shetty Vs State of TN and others and has held as under:-

"In view of it we hold that the petitioners are entitled to continue till the time they are replaced by regularly appointed persons in accordance with R&P Rules."

 

(6.5) That the Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Bala Vs State of Tamil Nadu has also held as under:-

"After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we allow the writ petition and direct the respondents to continue the petitioners in service until persons regularly selected by the Punjab Public Service Commission are appointed to the posts presently held by the petitioners and join these posts. These petitioners who have been appointed to posts in leave vacancies will continue in these posts until the employees who have proceeded on leave return and

Sat appoint panchayat wrongful termination

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

 

OA No.:_____ of 2004

 

Applicant

 

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order issued by the respondent No. 3, (Annexure A-1) whereby he has directed the respondent No. 4 to sponsor the name of some other candidate for the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak at Gram Panchayat Satog and terminate the services of the applicant arbitrarily and illegally.

The said impugned order is arbitrary, illegal, malafide, violative of the Constitutional Rights and natural justice and issued in colourable exercise of power.

4. Jurisdiction

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

6.1 That the applicant submits that _______

6.2 That the respondent state vide its notification No. _____________ dated _____________ has authorized Gram Panchayat Assistant's post to the respondent No. 4 Panchayat, to be filled in by the concerned Gram Pradhan. (Annexure A-2)

6.3 That now the respondent No. 3 vide letter No. _________________ dated ______________ (A-1) has informed the respondent No. 4 that while appointing the Gram Panchayat Assistants the special care be taken that the candidate for the above post should not be a father, grand father, in-laws, uncle, son, daughter, grand-son, brother, nephew, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, wife, sister, son-in-law of any of the officials/members of the Panchayat.

GROUNDS

6.4 That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of others :-

(a) That the impugned order A-1 issued by the respondent is arbitrary, malafide, illegal, ultra vires, against the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, dehors the rules and regulations and against the natural justice.

(b) That the applicant has been selected and appointed in accordance with the provisions laid down in A-2 after following the due process. The provisions of A-2 cannot be over-ridden by an executive order A-1 and the A-1 is thus ultra vires. Moreover, no such embargo can be imposed by the respondent No. 2 or 3 on the appointment of the applicant as it clearly violates the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(c) That the respondents are estopped due to their own act, deed and conduct. The principle of the Promissory Estopple applies against the respondents.

(d) That the impugned order is against the well settled principles of the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Hon'ble Tribunal in catena of cases.

7. Reliefs Sought:

THAT the applicant, therefore, prays that your Lordship be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, orders or directions to grant the following reliefs in favour of the applicant in the interest of justice:-

(a) Quash the impugned order issued arbitrarily, malafidely and illegally by the respondents;

(b) Direct the respondents to permit the applicant to continue in service as Gram Panchayat Sahayak and send the applicant for the training in accordance with the provisions of A-2;

(c) Direct the respondents to produce all the relevant documents for perusal by this Hon'ble Tribunal;

(d) Allow the cost of this O.A.;

(e) Pass such other order or directions as deemed fit and proper in favour of the applicant.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE HUMBLE

Sat appoint compensiate

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

OA No:_____ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the TN Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned action of the respondents whereby they are not permitting the applicant to appear in the interview to be held on ___________ for the post of ______________ and the applicant is also aggrieved by the action of the respondent Employment Exchange whereby they have not sponsored the name of the applicant for the above post despite the fact that juniors to the applicant have been sponsored.

The said impugned action is arbitrary, illegal, malafide, violative of the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitutional Rights and natural justice and issued in colourable exercise of power.

4. Jurisdiction:

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

1. That the applicant submits that ____

GROUNDS

2. That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of others

Sat appoint anganwadi selection not as per rules

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

 

OA No.:______ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order issued by the respondents __

4. Jurisdiction

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

6.1 That the applicant submits that ______

6.2 That the respondent department while calling the applicant for interview has sought for the following documents, which were duly produced by the applicant:-

(i) School Certificates (For Educational qualifications)

(ii) Certificate of permanent residence of ____________,

(iii) IRDP Certificate

(iv) Certificate indicating that the applicant belonged to the same village and distance certificate

(v) Affidavit indicating that there is none in the Govt / Semi-govt service from the family of the applicant.

(vi) Certificate of Caste/Tribe.

(vii) Experience Certificate of any type.

6.3 That _____

 

GROUNDS

6.4 That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of others :-

(a) That the impugned order A-_______ issued by the respondent is arbitrary, malafide, illegal, ultra vires, against the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, dehors the rules and regulations and

Sat application 1

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL TN AT CHENNAI

 

O. A. No:_____ of 2004

 

Applicant

 

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth:

1. Particulars of the Applicant:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned action of the respondents whereby they __.

The said impugned action is arbitrary, illegal, malafide, violative of the Constitutional Rights and natural justice and issued in colourable exercise of power

4. Jurisdiction:

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

(a) That the facts leading to filing of the present case and the relevant facts are furnished hereunder in chronological order for the convenience of this Hon’ble court: -

(b) That __

 

GROUNDS

(c) That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of others: -

(i) That the impugned action of the respondent is arbitrary, malafide, illegal, ultra vires, against the Article 39 (d) read with 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, dehors the rules and regulations and against the natural justice.

(ii) That ______

7. Reliefs Sought:

That the applicant, therefore, prays that your Lordship be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, orders or directions to

Sat against disciplinary action

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL TN AT CHENNAI

OA No:_____ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

 

Respondents

OA Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth:

1. Particulars of the Applicant:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents:

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned action of the respondents whereby they ____.

The said impugned action is arbitrary, illegal, malafide, violative of the Constitutional Rights and natural justice and issued in colourable exercise of power.

4. Jurisdiction:

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

(a) That the facts leading to filing of the present case and the relevant facts are furnished hereunder in chronological order for the convenience of this Hon’ble court: -

(b) That _______

GROUNDS

(c) That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of others: -

(i) That the impugned action of the respondent is arbitrary, malafide, illegal, ultra vires, against the Article 39 (d) read with 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, dehors the rules and regulations and against the natural justice.

(ii) That_____________________ _____

(iii) ____________________That as per the settled principle of law, the alleged misconducts pertaining to the period prior to the promotion of the applicant stands condoned. As such the misconducts in Articles of Charges Nos. _______________________ cannot be made grounds for punishment of the applicant. The Disciplinary Authority was prejudiced against the applicant and due to malafide intention and for the extraneous reasons has awarded impugned punishments on the applicant.

(iv) __________________That on ________________ (Annexure A-_____), the applicant was served with charge sheet by the Disciplinary Authority for the following four charges:-

(v) _________That the applicant submits that on __________ (Annexure A-____) the applicant has prayed for copy of _______________ mentioned in the Annexure A-III with the Charge Sheet so as to enable the applicant to submit his written statement of defense as sought for by the Disciplinary Authority.

(vi) ____________ That it is against well established principles of law, rules and regulations that the person who happens to be witness cannot be appointed as Presenting Officer and vice versa.

(vii) __________________That the applicant submits that on ____________ (Annexure A-____) the applicant made a representation to the Disciplinary Authority with a copy of the same endorsed to and got received on the same date by the Inquiry Officer, praying therein that the applicant is entitled to seek assistance of a defense assistant in his disciplinary case as per the relevant provisions and therefore the applicant may be granted permission to engage Defense Assistant, Sh. _______________________, who is an advocate. It was also stated therein that Sh. __________________________ has also consented to assist the applicant in the afore-mentioned case in the inquiry. It was obligatory on the part of the Disciplinary Authority to allow Defense Assistant to the applicant and further proceedings could be proceeded only after the Defense Assistant has been allowed to the applicant.

(viii) ______________________That the applicant further submits that the said charge sheet was further amended on ____________ (Annexure A-_____) without affording the opportunity to the applicant to file reply to the said

For condonation of delay in filing of ________

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL TN AT COIMBATORE

 

MA No.:______ of 2009 in OA No.:______

Applicants/Non-Applicants

 

Versus

 

Respondents/Applicants

Application under Rule 8 (3) of TN Administrative Tribunal Rules for condonation of delay in filing of ________ .

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. That the above mentioned OA is filed in this Hon'ble Tribunal by the original applicants.

2. ____________________________

3. That filing of reply/rejoinder _______________________ is essential for adjudication of the matter in interest of

Sat Appoint Selection Without Eligibility

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

 

OA No.:______ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

 

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order of the respondents whereby they have selected and appointed the respondent No. __ as Part Time Water Carrier in GPS __ despite not being eligible.

4. Jurisdiction

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

6.1 That the applicant has applied for the post of Part Time Water Carrier in Govt Pry School __, under Block Primary Education Officer __ and under Gram Panchayat __. The applicant also belongs to the same Gram Panchayat and the distance of the applicant's residence from the School is only __.

6.2 The applicant possesses the following qualifications and certificates which were duly produced before the Selection Committee on the date of interview as called for by them:-

- Matriculation _____% marks A-_______

- Plus Two __% marks A-__

- SC A-__

- Handicap A-__

- Land Donation A-__

- IRDP A-__

- Un-employed Family A-__

6.3 That the interview for the said posts were held at __ on __ in which the applicant alongwith the respondent No. __ and other candidates participated. __

6.4 That the marks are to be allocated in the manner prescribed in the Part Time Water Carrier Scheme, as per which the applicant viz-a-viz Respondent No. __ scores the marks as

Sat Appoint Selection Panchayat Favouritism

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE TN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

 

O. A. No:______ of 2004

 

Applicant

Versus

 

Respondents

Application Under Section 19 of the T.N. Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Chennai

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. Particulars of the Applicant

As given in the Memo of Parties.

2. Particulars of the Respondents

As given in the Memo of Parties.

3. Impugned Order:

That the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order issued by the respondent No. 4, (Annexure A __) whereby he has appointed the respondent No. 5 as Gram Panchayat Sahayak, being his relative in as much as the respondent No. 5 is ___________ of the respondent No. 4.

The said impugned order is arbitrary, illegal, malafide, violative of the Constitutional Rights and natural justice and issued in colourable exercise of power.

4. Jurisdiction

That the applicant declares that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

5. Limitation:

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation.

6. Facts of the Case:

6.1 That the applicant submits that ______

6.2 That the respondent state vide its notification No. __________ dated _____ has authorized Gram Panchayat Assistant's post to the respondent No. _____ Panchayat, to be filled in by the concerned Gram Pradhan. (Annexure A-2)

6.3 That the respondent No. _____ vide letter No. _____ dated _____ (A-1) has even specifically informed the respondent No. 4 that while appointing the Gram Panchayat Assistants the special care be taken that the candidate for the above post should not be a father, grand father, in-laws, uncle, son, daughter, grand-son, brother, nephew, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, wife, sister, son-in-law of any of the officials/members of the Panchayat. The main reason behind the A-1 is to avoid nepotism and favouritism and ensure transparency and fair play in the matter of appointment as Gram Panchayat Sahayaks. The above instructions are therefore in keeping with the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

GROUNDS

6.4 That feeling aggrieved by such an arbitrary, malafide, discriminatory and illegal actions of the respondents, the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, which may be taken at the time of arguments, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of others :-

(a) That the impugned action of the respondent No. 4 whereby he has selected and appointed the respondent No. 5 as Gram Panchayat Sahayak is arbitrary, malafide, illegal, ultra vires, against the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, dehors the rules and regulations and against the natural justice.

(b) That the applicant has not been selected and appointed in accordance with the provisions laid down in A-2 after following the due process.

(c) That the action of the respondent No. 4 in selecting and appointing the respondent No. 5 as Gram Panchayat Sahayak is bereft of transparency and fair play and smacks of nepotism and favouritism.

(d) That the respondents are estopped due to their own act, deed and conduct. The principle of the Promissory Estopple applies against the respondents.

(e) That the impugned order is against the well settled principles of the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Hon'ble Tribunal in catena of cases.

7. Reliefs Sought:

That the applicant, therefore, prays that your Lordship be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, orders or directions to grant the following reliefs in favour of the applicant in the interest of justice:-

(a) Quash the impugned order issued arbitrarily, malafidely and illegally by the respondents;

(b) Direct the respondent No. 4 to select and appoint the applicant for the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak and send the applicant for the training in accordance with the provisions of A-2;

(c) Direct the respondents to produce all the relevant documents for

Rules 1987 for impleading the applicant

as respondent in OA No. _____

 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT COIMBATORE

MA No.:______ of 2004 in OA No: ______

 

Applicant/Non-applicant

Versus

Respondents/Non-applicants

Proposed Respondent/Applicant

Application Under Rule 8 (3) of HP State Administrative Rules 1987 for impleading the applicant as respondent in OA No. _____________ titled as _______________

Coimbatore

 

Applicant

 

Through, Advocate

Respectfully Sheweth :

1. That the Original applicants have filed OA in this Hon'ble Tribunal which is pending adjudication.

2. That from perusal of the relief sought by the original applicant, it is evident that if the same is allowed it will adversely affect the interests of the present applicant and the original applicant has intentionally chosen not to