Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 208 (2.79 seconds)
Documents citing D.S. Nakara & Others vs Union Of India on 17 December, 1982

Usha Rani Bajaj vs Ministry Of Education on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Usha Balla vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghthan on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kusum Dhawan vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghthan on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manoj Kumar vs Kvs on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ashish Kumar Mitra vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghthan on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Neeta Khurana vs Kvs on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Amrit Pal vs Kvs on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Tarkeshwar Tiwari vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghthan on 23 May, 2025

Nakara [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 : 1983 SCC (L&S) 145] cannot, therefore, be an authority for this case.‖ Having observed that the Pension Scheme and the Provident Fund Scheme were structurally different, it was then concluded that the retirees in both categories did not belong to the same class and that there was no discrimination. The challenge was, therefore, rejected.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next