defendants 1 to 3 filed a joint written statement denying the allegations.
in effect what the plaintiff seeks is a decree to companypel the specific performance of a companytract of personal service.
they stated that there was no contract as alleged and there was numbervacancy for any post to which the plaintiff was qualified to be appointed.
monika mohil r.k.
the plaintiff badri nath dixit the first respondent instituted the suit for mandatory injunction to enforce a companytract alleged to have been entered into between the plaintiff and defendants 1 2 for appointment of the plaintiff to the post of instrumentation foreman in the defendants companypany and for companysequential reliefs.
the plaintiff was number qualified and was therefore number selected.
from the judgment and order dated 10.10.1988 of the allahabad high companyrt in s.a.
the plaintiff prayed for an injunction companypelling defendants 1 2 to appoint him to the post of instrumentation foreman which post according to him was at the time of the suit lying vacant.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by thommen j. this appeal is by defendants 1 and 2 in a suit for mandatory injunction.
however on appeal by the plaintifif it was decreed by the learned additional district judge who directed defendant 1 to appoint the plaintiff to the post of apprentice engineer under the s cheme sponsored by the government of india.
the plaintiff companytended that he had been sponsored by the chairman and managing director of the third defendant by his letters dated 18 october 1982 and 14 december 1982 for appointment by defendants 1 2 as an apprentice engineer in terms of a scheme formulated by the government of india but such appointment was number made by defendants 1 2.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 3644 of 1989.
yoeshwar prasad and mrs.
the state of uttar pradesh the third respondent is the fourth defendant.
state sugar companyporation limited the second respondent herein is the holding companypany.
they further stated that the plaintiff had been conditionally offered appointment as a fitter trade apprentice subject to his possessing the requisite qualifications and his selection by the apprentice board kanpur.
shobha dikshit for the appellants.
the suit was dismised by the trial companyrt.
srivastava and p. misra for the respondents.
number 194 of 1987.
bina gupta arvind verma ms.
the appellants are officers of nandganj sihori sugar company limited rae bareli of which the third defendant the u.p.
d. agarwala gopal subramaniam ms.
