Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.55 seconds)

The State Of Bihar & Ors vs Jitendra Nath Verma & Anr on 7 March, 2011

3. While assailing the validity of the order of learned Single Judge, the learned Addl. Advocate General submits that the action of the Board of Directors of the Corporation adopting the Rules and Regulations of the State of Bihar was its unilateral act and cannot bind the State of Bihar. Therefore, the State of Bihar cannot be forced to allow respondent no.1 to continue till the age of 60 years. The 4 aforesaid notification dated 24.3.2005 was confined to the employees of the State of Bihar. By deputation to the State of Bihar, respondent no.1 does not become its employee. He relies on the order dated 7.9.2009, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No.492 of 2008 (Md. Nijam Vs State of Bihar), and the analogous appeal, and also the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in the Case of The State of Bihar Vs Braj Mohan Prasad & Ors, reported in 2010(1) P.L.J.R. 707.
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 3 - Cited by 2 - S K Katriar - Full Document

The Bihar State Construction C vs B.S.Construction Corpn.Ltd.Kar on 16 December, 2010

The issue raised in this appeal was subject matter of the judgment dated 08.01.2010, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 812 of 2009, and the analogous appeals (State of Bihar Vs. Braj Mohan Prasad), reported in 2010 (1) P.L.J.R. 707, wherein it has been held that the orders of the learned Single Judges 2 raising the age of superannuation of the employees of Public Sector undertakings of Bihar to 60 years is bad in law. The present appeal is entirely covered by the said judgment.
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - S K Katriar - Full Document
1