Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 243 (1.46 seconds)
Documents citing Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs State Of H.P on 19 April, 1994

Sh. Atma Ram vs State Of Himachal on 7 March, 2022

12. No doubt petitioners are not covered under the Policy formulated and approved by the Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhaya's case, but in terms of pronouncements of the Division Bench of this Court in Rakesh Kumar' case which has attained finality for affirmation from the Supreme Court, read with pronouncement of this High Court in Ashwani Kumar's case, petitioners are entitled for conferring work-charge status immediately on completion of 8 years continuous service as daily waged with 240 working days in each calendar year. These judgments are binding in nature and it is settled law that binding decision should neither be ignored nor be overlooked.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

Ex. Fitter vs The State Of Himachal on 21 October, 2022

reading the rules consistent with Articles 14, 38 and 39 of the Constitution of India and applying the doctrine of proportionate equality that a method was devised for giving weightage to the daily waged service towards pension in the manner mandated in the judgment. However, the judgment was specifically made applicable only to the appellants, who were Class-IV employees and similarly placed Class-IV employees. The judgment falls within the ambit of Article 142 of the Constitution of India. It has an overriding effect on CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, but only vis-à-vis Class-IV category of employees. Its benefit cannot be extended to the petitioner, a retired Class-III employee. The argument of discrimination between Class-IV and Class-III employees vis-à-vis counting of daily waged service for the purpose of pension on the basis of applicability of judgments in Sunder Singh and Mool Raj Upadhyaya's cases is misplaced. The issue in Mool Raj Upadhyaya's case pertained to regularization of daily waged Class-III and Class-IV employees. Question of counting daily waged service or giving weightage to daily waged service towards ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2022 20:06:35 :::CIS 29 qualifying service for grant of pension was not involved there.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - J R Dua - Full Document

Surjeet Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others on 31 October, 2023

13. It is undisputed that in Mool Raj Upadhaya Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316, affidavit was filed by Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, formulating a Scheme for granting work-charged status to all daily-waged employees, serving in the State of Himachal Pradesh, in all Departments, irrespective of the fact that Department is/or was having work-charged establishment or not.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

Division Nahan vs State Of H.P. In Erstwhile H.P. State ... on 2 May, 2022

In Gauri Dutt and others Vs. State of H.P., reported in Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366, it has been held that the scheme formulated in Mool Raj Upadhaya's case is applicable to daily-waged employees working in any department of the state of Himachal Pradesh and the employees, who are not governed by the directions given in Mool Raj Upadhaya's case, shall be governed by a Scheme framed by the State in this regard and it has also been observed that granting of work-charged status would mean that an employee would get regular scale of pay. 23.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next