Narasingaraja vs The Director General Of Police / on 28 October, 2021
In P.Karunakaran's case (supra), the Honourable Division
Bench of this Court has held as follows:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (2.67 seconds)Documents citing
P.K. Saraswat, T.P. Sharma, Ravi ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 4 September, 1998
Vinod Kumar Nautiyal vs M/O Home Affairs on 21 March, 2023
the respondents to grant the revised scale of
Rs. 5500-9000/-, Rs. 6500-10,500/-, Rs. 7500-
12000/- and Rs. 10,000-15,200/- to the Hindi
Translator Grade-II, Hindi Translator Grade-I,
Hindi Officer and Senior Hindi Officer
respectively in Assam Rifles w.e.f. 01.01.1996 at
least on notional basis and actual payment of
upgraded scale w.e.f. 11.02.2003 in terms of
Annexure-I and II hereto, and further revised
scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/-, Rs. 7450-11,500/- and
Rs. 8000-13,500/- respectively w.e.f. 01.01.2006
in terms of Annexure-III & IV hereto, with all
consequential benefit including arrear
monetary benefit, in the light of the judgment
rendered by the Hon'ble Tribunal on 25.05.2010,
in O.A. 331/2009, passed by the Principal
Bench, New Delhi in the case of Shri Shiv Kumar
Gaur-Vs-Union of India & Ors.) as well as in the
light of judgment and order dated 08.08.2008
passed by the Learned Tribunal, Kolkata Bench
in O.A. 615/2006 (D.K. Rai & Ors. Vs. Union of
India).
Nima Ongdi Lepcha vs State Of Sikkim And Ors. on 12 May, 2006
It is, therefore, clear that the question whether the Act No, 1 of 1988 stood repealed by the application of the decision of the Single Bench in P.K. Saraswat's case, and whether It applied In the fact situation of Anil Lachungpa's case, never received consideration of the Court.
State Of Punjab And Anr vs Rajesh Syal on 4 October, 2002
Learned counsel for the respondent drew our attention to another order
passed by this Court in Writ Petition (Crl.) Nos. 72-75/2000 (P.K. Sharma
v. Union of India) dated 5th May, 2000; whereby it directed that the said
petition be disposed of in terms of the earlier order of 28th March, 2000
in V.K. Sharma's case.
Satnam Singh vs Union Territory on 7 September, 2012
15. The respondents have also submitted that against four posts meant for diploma / Non Diploma Holder category and one vacant post of Drawing quota available, the respondents initiated the case for filling up three posts of AEs from amongst Additional A.Es (AAEs) having Diploma in Electrical Engineering and one post of AE from amongst the feeder cadre of Circle Head Draftsman having requisite experience as prescribed in the recruitment rules. The aforesaid Additional Assistant Engineers / Circle Head Draftsman are senior most in the cadre and senior to the applicants. The present vacancies pertain to the share / quota of diploma holder AAE/JE Grade-I and Circle Head Draftsman and none of them relate to Degree Holders. The claim of the applicants shall be considered at the appropriate time when any vacancy relating to their quota falls vacant as per their position in the seniority list as well as the other essential requirements provided under the statutory rules including Vigilance Clearance, bench-mark etc. as well as after taking into account the status of degree qualifications acquired by applicants. The Original Application is pre-mature as applicants have not waited for a decision on their representation date 31.1.2012 (R-6) On the basis of Punjab Rules of 1965, S/Shri Rohit Kumar Sekhri and Pawan Kumar Sharma, AEs were promoted as AEE vide orders dated 28.7.2011, as per order of this Tribunal in O.A.No. 15-CH-2011 titled P.K. Sharma & Others Vs. Union of India & Others (R-6 and R-7) which were decided in terms of decision in M.P. Singhs case (supra). Further promotions have also taken place as per Pb. Regulations of 1965, amended from time to time and adopted by the Chandigarh Administration.
S.Kasiramalingam vs The Chief Secretary on 28 September, 2012
(5)Mahesh Chandra Gupta V. Union of India reported in (2009) 8 SCC 273 ; and
(6)An unreported order of the Delhi High Court in D.K.Sharma V. Union of India & Others (W.P.(C)No.2231 of 2011 dated 08.04.2011).
Dheeraj Mor vs The Hon???Ble High Court Of Delhi on 19 February, 2015
Thus, the petitioner cannot draw any advantage and support
from the decision in the case of D.K. Sharma (supra).
Articles 233, 217 and 124 operate in their own fields.
This petitioner is not in practice in praesenti i.e. on the date
immediately preceding this application.
Vinod Kumar Nautiyal vs M/O Home Affairs on 15 March, 2019
8.2 That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to direct
the respondents to grant the revised scale of
Rs. 5500-9000/-, Rs. 6500-10,500/-, Rs. 7500-
12,000/- and Rs. 10,000-15,200/- to the Hindi
Translator Grade-III, Hindi Translator Grade-I,
Hindi Officer and Senior Hindi Officer
respectively in Assam Rifles w.e.f 01.01.1996 at
least on notional basis and actual payment
of upgraded scale w.e.f. 11.02.2003 in terms
of Annexure-I and II hereto, and further
revised scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/-, Rs. 7450-
11,500/- and Rs. 8000-13,500/- respectively
w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in terms of Annexure-III & IV
hereto, with all consequential benefit
including arrear monetary benefit, in the light
of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble
Tribunal on 25.05.2010, in O.A. 331/2009,
passed by the Principal Bench, New Delhi in
the case of Shri Shiv Kumar Gaur - Vs. Union
of India & Ors.) as well as in the light of
judgment and order dated 08.08.2008 passed
by the Learned Tribunal, Kolkata Bench in
O.A. 615/2006 (D.K. Rai & Ors. Vs. Union of
India).
Union Of India & Anr vs Girbar Singh & Ors on 22 September, 2022
17. Perusal of ground D clearly shows that petitioners have not
even attempted to distinguish the case of the respondents from that of
D.K.Sharma (Supra).
Kripa Shankar Shukla vs State Of U.P. And Others on 15 September, 1999
They are not relevant for consideration as has Seen held In T. K. Das v. Union of India, 1980 (1) SLR 416 Cal (DB), the principle laid down Fijji's case (supra), has been applied by the High Courts In a number of cases, such as P. C. Pradhan v. Union of India, 1981 (1) SLR 1 (MP) (DB) ; Mohanlal Capoor v. State of U. P. 1984 (2) SLR 371 (All) (DB) ; Dulal Kumar Majumdar v. State of West Bengal, 1981 (2) SLR 780 Cal (DB) ; H. Veerabhadrappa v. Deputy Commissioner, Raichur, 1980 (2) SLR 462 (Kant) ; M. S. Sharma v. State of A. P., 1981 (3) SLR 760 (AP) ; Nathu Dharamji Padole v. Commissioner.