THE CORRESPONDENT AND ORS. ETC. vs A.M.SANKEY JOHN AND ANR. ETC. — C.A. No. 10506 - 10510/2011

Case under Section XII-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010164362010

Filing Date

18-May-2010

Registration No

C.A. No. 10506 - 10510/2011

Diary Number

16436/2010

Order Date

09-Jan-2019

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2017 INSC 1208

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 05-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XII-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE CORRESPONDENT AND ORS. ETC.

    Adv. R. CHANDRACHUD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.A.M.SANKEY JOHN AND ANR. ETC.

    Adv. M. YOGESH KANNA SESHATALPA SAI BANDARU ROMY CHACKO (Dead / Retired / Elevated)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Dec-2017

    JudgementView PDF

  3. 11-Dec-2017

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar

  4. 23-Nov-2017

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar

  5. 13-Oct-2017

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud

  6. 25-Aug-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 02-Mar-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 02-Mar-2017

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 02-Mar-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 16-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 16-Feb-2017

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 16-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 09-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 09-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 08-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 08-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 01-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 01-Feb-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 29-Sep-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 29-Sep-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 10-Aug-2016

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  22. 03-Aug-2016

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  23. 14-Jul-2016

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  24. 04-Apr-2016
  25. 04-Apr-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  26. 04-Apr-2016
  27. 08-Feb-2016
  28. 08-Feb-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  29. 08-Feb-2016
  30. 04-Feb-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  31. 04-Feb-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  32. 09-Dec-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  33. 09-Dec-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  34. 19-Nov-2015
  35. 19-Nov-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  36. 19-Nov-2015
  37. 13-Oct-2015

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  38. 01-Sep-2015
  39. 01-Sep-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  40. 01-Sep-2015
  41. 27-Feb-2015
  42. 27-Feb-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  43. 27-Feb-2015
  44. 02-May-2014

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  45. 02-May-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  46. 24-Apr-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  47. 07-Oct-2013

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  48. 07-Oct-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  49. 18-Nov-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  50. 06-May-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  51. 08-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  52. 07-Mar-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  53. 04-Feb-2011
  54. 25-Jan-2011
  55. 25-Jan-2011
  56. 07-Jan-2011
  57. 13-Dec-2010
  58. 28-Oct-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  59. 08-Sep-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  60. 02-Aug-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  61. 14-Jul-2010
  62. 18-May-2010

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 10506 - 10510/2011

  63. 30-Apr-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  64. 23-Apr-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  65. [ 2017 INSC 1208 ]

    JudgementView PDF

Common Record of Proceedings — heard with connected matters

Lead case: C.A. No. 10478 - 10498/2011

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of C.A. No. 010506-010510/2011 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's 2010 judgment that had found the school teachers' termination violated natural justice principles. The Court remanded the matter to the High Court after the District Education Officer rejected the teachers' appointment approvals, declaring the appointing authority incompetent. Both respondents and two other affected teachers may challenge this rejection order before the High Court, which was requested to dispose expeditiously and examine appointment authority competency issues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case