Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing Rajbir Singh vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 14 November, 2014

M/S Omaxe Housing And Development ... vs Rajbir Singh And Others on 2 May, 2017

Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case noted above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned, this Court is of the considered view that instant transfer application deserves to be accepted and the same is hereby allowed. Civil Suit No.3820 of 2013 titled as Rajbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others is ordered to be transferred from Panchkula to Sonepat.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R S Malik - Full Document

Madan Lal vs Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd ... on 13 March, 2015

After having taken through all the judgments and also after having gone through the judgment of this Court in Rajbir Singh vs State of Haryana and others, CWP No.25512 of 2012, decided on 14.11.2014, I have not found even a single fact situation where any Court has permitted a person to catch up with a junior who climbed up two steps ahead of him as in the present case. However, counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in V.B Nanda and others' case (supra), a reserved category junior had climbed up two steps ahead of the petitioners therein, but the respondents had given him the benefit. In that case, the petitioners therein had only claimed that they should be granted pay from the date/s of their promotion and this Court had allowed that plea. However, there was no finding that the said petitioners were entitled to catch up on their erstwhile juniors. Counsel for the respondents have accepted that this was done but state that this was a mistake and, therefore, this mistake cannot give a right to the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners has argued that having granted the relief to the petitioners in V.B Nanda and others' case (supra), the respondent-State cannot take a different view for the present petitioners as it would amount to discrimination.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

Aman Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 20 February, 2018

10. Issue regarding reservation in promotion with reference to various judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court starting from M. Nagaraj's case (supra), where constitutional validity of Article 16(4-A) of the Constitution of India was under challenge, was considered by this Court in Rajbir Singh's case (supra). The opinion expressed was that Article 16 (4-A) of the Constitution of India is an enabling provision. However, power conferred under that Article can be exercised only after the State forms an opinion on the basis of quantifiable data regarding inadequate representation of members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes in service, with a caveat that such power can be exercised 3 of 15 ::: Downloaded on - 21-05-2018 20:52:31 ::: CWP No. 16039 of 2014 (O&M) (4) keeping in view the overall efficiency in service as envisaged under Article 335 of the Constitution of India. Relevant paras thereof are extracted below:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - R Bindal - Full Document

Mohinder Lal vs U.H.B.V.N.Ltd. And Ors on 14 March, 2018

"After having taken through all the judgments and also after having gone through the judgment of this Court in Rajbir Singh vs State of Haryana and others, CWP No.25512 of 2012, decided on 14.11.2014, I have not found even a single fact situation where any Court has permitted a person to catch up with a junior who climbed up two steps ahead of him as in the present case. However, counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in V.B Nanda and others' case (supra), a reserved category junior had climbed up two steps ahead of the petitioners therein, but the respondents had given him the benefit. In that case, the petitioners therein had only claimed that they should be granted pay from the date/s of their promotion and this Court had allowed that plea. However, there was no finding that the said petitioners were entitled to catch up on their erstwhile juniors. Counsel for the respondents have accepted that this was done but state that this was a mistake and, therefore, this mistake cannot give a right to the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners has argued that having granted the relief to the petitioners in V.B Nanda and others' case (supra), the respondent-State cannot take a different view for the present petitioners as it would amount to discrimination.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R N Raina - Full Document

Rattan Singh vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 23 December, 2014

This order shall dispose of CWP No.17590 of 2014 titled as Rattan Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17591 of 2014 titled as Rajender Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17630 of 2014 titled as Yudhvir Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17631 of 2014 titled as Ram Niwas Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17633 of 2014 titled as Surender Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17639 of 2014 titled as Satyavir @ Satbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17641 of 2014 titled as Dhanraj Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17647 of 2014 titled as Rajbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17652 of 2014 titled as Dharamvir Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17654 of 2014 titled as Umed Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17655 of 2014 titled as Parveen Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17659 of 2014 titled as Samunder HARJEET KAUR 2014.12.26 01:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No.17590 of 2014 -2- Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others, CWP No.17665 of 2014 titled as Satyawan Vs. State of Haryana & others and CWP No.17686 of 2014 titled as Vijay Singh Vs. State of Haryana & others as identical issue has been raised in these bunch of petitions.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - T S Dhindsa - Full Document

Sukhdev Singh & Ors vs Haryana State Coop Agri Rural Dev Bank ... on 12 January, 2015

Respondent No.1 is directed that if the petitioners approach him within a period of two weeks from today by moving an appropriate representation, he shall consider and decide the same at an early date, by passing an appropriate order thereon, strictly in accordance with law and also keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in Rajbir Singh's case (supra) as well as the order dated 1.12.2014 passed by this Court in CWP No. 1852 of 2014 (Sant Lal and others Vs. State of Haryana and others). Respondent No.1 shall make an endeavour to decide the representation within a reasonable time but in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representations from the petitioners.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R S Malik - Full Document

Dalbir Singh vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 12 January, 2015

Respondent No.2 is directed that if the petitioners approach him within a period of two weeks from today by moving an appropriate representation, he shall consider and decide the same at an early date, by passing an appropriate order thereon, strictly in accordance with law and also keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in Rajbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others CWP No. 25512 of 2012 decided on 14.11.2014 as well as the order dated 1.12.2014 passed by this Court in CWP No. 1852 of 2014 (Sant Lal and others Vs. State of Haryana and others). Respondent No.2 shall make an endeavour to decide the representation within a reasonable time but in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representations from the petitioners.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R S Malik - Full Document

Baldev Singh vs Haryana State Coop. Agricultural Rural ... on 12 January, 2015

Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3, at the very outset, fairly states that in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 25512 of 2012 (Rajbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others) decided on 14.11.2014, present writ petition may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent authorities by moving an appropriate representation within a period of four weeks from today and the competent authority may be directed to consider and decide the same, within a reasonable time.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R S Malik - Full Document
1   2 Next