Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 141 (3.79 seconds)
Documents citing Dr. Chakradhar Paswan vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 8 March, 1988

Dr.M.Ponnuswamy vs University Of Madras on 20 February, 2008

7. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent University on the other hand submitted that the decision relied on by the petitioner is relating to the appointment of faculty members in each department and when a single post is available in a department, there cannot be any reservation of that post and the same was found illegal in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1988 SC 959 (Dr.Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar) and the said decision has nothing to do with the transfer of faculty members from one department to another department to handle classes of inter-disciplinary subjects. The learned Additional Advocate General further submitted that no faculty member will be transferred to other faculty, which has no relevant subject and a scheme will be evolved in consultation with the competent faculty members in the respective areas of studies and a strategy will be adopted and no faculty member will be put to any disadvantage. It is also pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General that as per the Annexure filed in the typed set of papers, there are 65 departments and in some departments there are more number of students, however there is less number of faculty members and in some departments either there is no students or very few students, however, the faculty members are on the higher side. Therefore, the University resolved to re-deploy the excess faculty members to needy departments, that too only in the inter- disciplinary departments. Hence there will be no dilution of standards in the departments and the interest of the teaching staff will be taken care of. The Additional Advocate General also submitted that in the appointment orders given to every faculty members, it is clearly stated that they are liable to be transferred including to the Institute of Distance Education and therefore no further amendment in the statute to transfer the Professors, Readers and Lecturers is warranted.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - N N Vasanthakumar - Full Document

Dr. M. Ponnuswamy, Professor, ... vs University Of Madras Rep. By Its ... on 20 February, 2008

7. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent University on the other hand submitted that the decision relied on by the petitioner is relating to the appointment of faculty members in each department and when a single post is available in a department, there cannot be any reservation of that post and the same was found illegal in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court (Dr. Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar) and the said decision has nothing to do with the transfer of faculty members from one department to another department to handle classes of inter-disciplinary subjects. The learned Additional Advocate General further submitted that no faculty member will be transferred to other faculty, which has no relevant subject and a scheme will be evolved in consultation with the competent faculty members in the respective areas of studies and a strategy will be adopted and no faculty member will be put to any disadvantage. It is also pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General that as per the Annexure filed in the typed set of papers, there are 65 departments and in some departments there are more number of students, however there is less number of faculty members and in some departments either there is no students or very few students, however, the faculty members are on the higher side. Therefore, the University resolved to re-deploy the excess faculty members to needy departments, that too only in the inter- disciplinary departments. Hence there will be no dilution of standards in the departments and the interest of the teaching staff will be taken care of. The Additional Advocate General also submitted that in the appointment orders given to every faculty members, it is clearly stated that they are liable to be transferred including to the Institute of Distance Education and therefore no further amendment in the statute to transfer the Professors, Readers and Lecturers is warranted.
Madras High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 3 - N N Vasanthakumar - Full Document

Smt. D. Vasantha Kamala W/O Sri V. ... vs State Of Karnataka By Its Secretary To ... on 17 November, 2006

The view taken by a Division Bench of this Court in Somashekarappa's case that the aforesaid ratio of the decision in Balaji's case was no longer valid in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas is not correct, as is evident from the three subsequent decisions of the Supreme court in A.B.S.K. Sangh v. Union of India, K.C. Vasantha Kumar v. State of Karnataka and in the case of Chakradhar v. State of Bihar.
Karnataka High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 2 - A Byrareddy - Full Document

Anand Kumar Singh vs State Of Bihar on 4 February, 1992

29. It is, therefore, clear that a postponed or deferred vacancy which is carried forward cannot be carried forward beyond three years. The carry forward vacancy lapses after a period of three years. The contention of the learned Advocate General is that in view of Dr. Chctkradhar Paswan's case (supra) the carry-forward rule cannot be extended beyond a period of three recruitment years. As noticed hereinbefore, the respondents have placed strong reliance upon the Circular letter of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms of the Government of India ; which has been circulated with Appointment Department (Bihar) by memo. No 7809, dated 6-12-1981 as contained in Annexure R-6/A to the counter affidavit of respondent No. 6.
Patna High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Dr. Arun Kumar vs Dr.G.Radhakrishna Pillai on 5 October, 2021

The question was answered in the negative by clarifying that total exclusion of general members of the public and cent per cent reservation for the backward classes is not permissible under the constitutional framework. That until there was plurality of posts in a cadre, the question of reservation would not arise because any attempt at reservation, by whatever means, and even through the device of rotation of roster in a single post cadre, was bound to create 100% reservation of such post whenever such reservation was to be implemented. The view taken in Dr. Chakradar Paswan (Supra) was approved by the constitution bench.
Kerala High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - A K Nambiar - Full Document

Chetana Dilip Motghare vs Bhide Girls' Education Society Nagpur on 22 January, 1993

4.We find no force in the above contentions raised in the review petition. A perusal of the order of the three-Judge Bench in Vidyulata case (supra) shows that there is only a mention that both the cases i.e. Arati Ray Choudhury v. Union of India3 as well as Dr Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar2 had been perused but no opinion was expressed that Chakradhar Paswan case (Dr)2 was not correctly decided. It was also mentioned in the above case decided by the three- Judge Bench that no copy of the writ petition had been filed and thus in the facts and circumstances of the case they declined to interfere with the decision of the High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 18 - N M Kasliwal - Full Document

Smt. Mamta Patel vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 June, 2024

31. The dispute that arose for consideration of this Court in Dr Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar & Ors. 14 relates to the posts of Director and three Deputy Directors in the Directorate of Indigenous Medicines, Department of Health, State of Bihar being grouped together for the purpose of implementing the 13 (1975) 1 SCC 319 14 (1988) 2 SCC 214 34 | P a g e policy of reservation under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. This Court was of the opinion that though the Director and three Deputy Directors are Class I posts, the posts of Director and Deputy Directors do not constitute one 'cadre'. It was held that the term "cadre" has a definite legal connotation in service jurisprudence. This Court referred to Fundamental Rule 9(4) which defines the word "cadre" to mean the strength of a service or part of a service sanctioned as a separate unit. It was observed that as the post of Director is the highest post in the Directorate of Indigenous Medicines for which a higher pay scale is prescribed in comparison to Deputy Directors, who are entitled to a lower scale of pay, they constitute two distinct cadres or grades. This Court further expressed its view that it is open to the Government to constitute as many cadres in any particular service as it may choose, according to administrative convenience and expediency. This Court Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:22309 Page 53 of 53 concluded that the post of Director and Deputy Directors constitute different cadres in the service".
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - N K Vyas - Full Document

Anuj Sharma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 June, 2024

31. The dispute that arose for consideration of this Court in Dr Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar & Ors. 14 relates to the posts of Director and three Deputy Directors in the Directorate of Indigenous Medicines, Department of Health, State of Bihar being grouped together for the purpose of implementing the 13 (1975) 1 SCC 319 14 (1988) 2 SCC 214 34 | P a g e policy of reservation under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. This Court was of the opinion that though the Director and three Deputy Directors are Class I posts, the posts of Director and Deputy Directors do not constitute one 'cadre'. It was held that the term "cadre" has a definite legal connotation in service jurisprudence. This Court referred to Fundamental Rule 9(4) which defines the word "cadre" to mean the strength of a service or part of a service sanctioned as a separate unit. It was observed that as the post of Director is the highest post in the Directorate of Indigenous Medicines for which a higher pay scale is prescribed in comparison to Deputy Directors, who are entitled to a lower scale of pay, they constitute two distinct cadres or grades. This Court further expressed its view that it is open to the Government to constitute as many cadres in any particular service as it may choose, according to administrative convenience and expediency. This Court Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:22309 Page 53 of 53 concluded that the post of Director and Deputy Directors constitute different cadres in the service".
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - N K Vyas - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next