CHANDRA KANT SAKLANI vs M.D,U.P.RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD. — C.A. No. 9949/2011

Case under Section III-A. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010229062006

Filing Date

08-Sep-2006

Registration No

C.A. No. 9949/2011

Diary Number

22906/2006

Order Date

13-Jul-2017

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Disposed Off

Last updated 01-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section III-A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHANDRA KANT SAKLANI

    Adv. GHANSHYAM JOSHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M.D,U.P.RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD.

    Adv. ALOK KUMAR (Dead / Retired / Elevated)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Jul-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 13-Jul-2017

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi

  4. 02-Sep-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 02-Sep-2016

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 02-Sep-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 27-Feb-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 26-Nov-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 19-Nov-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 14-Nov-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 29-Oct-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 07-Sep-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 07-Apr-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 15-Feb-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 08-Feb-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 11-Jan-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 13-Nov-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 26-Sep-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 21-Aug-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 10-Jul-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 09-Apr-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  22. 22-Sep-2006

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  23. 08-Sep-2006

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 9949/2011

View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Supreme Court disposed of Chandra Kant Saklani's appeal (CA 9949/2011) against U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. on July 13, 2017. The Court granted the appellant permission to intervene in High Court proceedings regarding Government orders converting most of his ad-hoc service into regular service, and allowed him liberty to file a representation concerning the remaining portion of ad-hoc service. No costs were imposed, and all pending applications were disposed of. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case