Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.45 seconds)
Documents citing Paras Ram vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors on 14 February, 2008

Mohinder Chhabra vs Union Of India And Others on 6 March, 2014

We may note that learned counsel for the petitioner in view of the long pendency of the lis and without prejudice to rights and contentions of the petitioner had even proposed that if admissible pension was given, he would persuade the petitioner and his family to put an end to the dispute. This fact was recorded in our order dated 12.02.2014. On the next date on 03.03.2014, we were informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that there was really no improvement in the medical condition of the petitioner. However, on instructions, learned counsel for the respondents stated that the petitioner cannot be granted any pension as out of the total period of more than 10 years of service, which would make the petitioner admissible to pension, there is a non-qualified service of 02 years, 10 months and 19 days. Strangely, this non-qualified service pertains to the period when the petitioner was suffering from schizophrenia and, thus, could have been easily waived away. Learned counsel for the petitioner even prayed for this non-qualified service to be counted in view of the judgements of the Rajasthan High Court as well as of this Court in Paras Ram Vs State of Rajasthan and others 2012(8) SLR 35 and Union of India Vs Smt. Shakuntala Devi and others 2009(8) SLR 698 respectively.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1