Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.38 seconds)
Documents citing Smt. Gayatri Devi Sharma vs State Of U.P. And Others on 16 July, 2019

Shashank Deepak vs Defence on 9 September, 2022

& Service Cases 509; Pradeep Kumar Agrawal v. Director, (1994) 1 UPLBEC 189; Sheo Kumar Sharma and Ors. v. District Shiksha Adhikari, Kanpur Dehat and Ors., (1991) 1 UPLBEC 690; Smt Gayatri Devi v. State of U.P., 1997 (2) UPLBEC 925, Pradip Kumar v. Director Local Bodies, 1994 (1) UPLBEC 156; Pawan Kumar Srivastava v. U.P. State Electricity Board, 1995 (1) UPLBEC 414; Shiv Kumar Sharma v. Basic Shiksha Adhikari, 1991 (1) UPLBEC 69; and Goverdhan Lal v. State of U.P. and Ors., 2000 (2) UPLBEC 1356, it has categorically been held that a transfer order passed under influence of any other person cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow Cites 79 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Jaya Malik vs State Of U P And 3 Others on 11 August, 2023

(iii). WRIT-A No. 8287 of 2021 (Smt. Gayatri Devi Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others). The petitioner approached the Court for reddressal of his grievance that the services rendered by the petitioner prior to her regularization i.e. for the period 05.01.1989 to 30.04.2012 have not been added in the qualifying service for grant of pension and other post retiral benefits.
Allahabad High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - R Misra - Full Document

Km. Kaushal Singh vs State Of U P And 3 Others on 11 August, 2023

(iii). WRIT-A No. 8287 of 2021 (Smt. Gayatri Devi Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others). The petitioner approached the Court for reddressal of his grievance that the services rendered by the petitioner prior to her regularization i.e. for the period 05.01.1989 to 30.04.2012 have not been added in the qualifying service for grant of pension and other post retiral benefits.
Allahabad High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - R Misra - Full Document

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy., Bal Vikas Evam ... vs Smt. Gayatri Devi on 1 August, 2019

4. This special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 2.1.2019 passed by the learned Writ Court in Service Single No. 388 of 2015 : Smt. Gayatri Devi Vs. State of U.P. and others, whereby the learned Writ Court, while allowing the writ petition, quashed the order dated 13.8.2014, by which the candidature of the writ petitioner for appointment on the post of Supervisor (Mukhyasevika) has been rejected on the ground that she has obtained 30 marks in the selection, whereas the minimum qualifying marks were 31. The learned Writ Court has also directed to the appellants herein to consider the claim of the writ petitioner for selection for having qualification of M.A. and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rampal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 13 January, 2023

The present petition has been filed alleging that the services rendered by the petitioner prior to the date of regularization for the period 17.03.1988 to 30.04.2012 have not been considered while deciding the issue of retiral benefits. He places reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Gayatri Devi Sharma vs. State of U.P. and others in Writ A No.8287 of 2021 decided on 12.08.2021. He argues that the said person was similarly as that of the petitioner and has been granted the benefit after the decision of this Court.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - N Tiwari - Full Document
1