Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing Manmohan Singh Sub Inspector vs State Of Haryana And Others ... on 2 February, 2010

Bhagwan Dass & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 13 July, 2016

The decision of the learned Single Judge in Sohan Singh, Sub Inspector v. The State of Haryana, 1992 (2) SCT 74 [paras.10 and 11] and of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Nirmal Singh, 2002 (2) S.C.T. 723 [para.2] and BCPP Mazdoor Sangh and another v. NTPC and others, 2007 (4) S.C.T. 724 (paras.26, 29 and 30) are not directly on the point and of no help. It will be useful to read rule 2.44 of the PCS Rules which defines "pay to mean in the scale of the post held by the Government employee, or to which he is entitled by reason of its position in a cadre" and Rule 6.19-C which defines the term "emoluments" when used for the purpose of emoluments reckoning from pension would mean "pay" as defined in Rule 2.44 of the PCS Rules, Vol. 1, Part 1 including dearness pay 5 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 19-07-2016 23:57:01 ::: CWP No.18318 of 2015 and connected cases -6- as determined by the orders of the Government issued from time to time, which the employee is receiving immediately before his retirement or the date of his death. Rule 6.24 (1) defines "average emoluments" to mean the average calculated up to the last ten months of qualifying service which is applicable to employees retiring after February 29, 1976. These provisions do not contemplate current duty charge and would not hold Mr. Chatrath in good stead to bring relief for his clients and the petitioners in the connected cases.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - R N Raina - Full Document
1