Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (2.17 seconds)

Union Of India vs Rahee Allied (Jv) And Ors on 8 March, 2022

The question whether a Government should be treated differently and should form a distinct and separate class while considering an application for condonation of delay has been considered in State of West Bengal vs. West Bengal Judicial Service Association reported at 1990(2) CLJ 73 and the State of West Bengal vs. Nipendra Nath Banerjee & Ors. reported at AIR 1992 Cal 179. The said two decisions have addressed the reasons why the Government should not suffer due to delay or latches which may not be deliberate. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an application late. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against 7 each other cause of substantial justice discerns to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non deliberate delay. If a proceeding initiated by the Government is nipped in the bud due to delay no person is individually affected. In the ultimate analysis the public interest is affected. It cannot be overlooked that the decisions of the Government are collective and institutional decisions and do not share the characteristics of decisions of private individuals. Government decisions are proverbially slow, incumbent, as they are, by a considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process of their making which may include preparing notes, file pushing and shifting the responsibility on others. The bureaucratic decision making process sometimes becomes too fatal for the Government. The relief under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is discretionary.
Calcutta High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S Sen - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Orissa Concrete And Allied Industries ... on 1 August, 2003

16. While on the question, we may also refer to the Bench decision of this court in the case of State of West Bengal v. West Bengal Judicial Service Association [1990] 2 CLJ 73, wherein it was observed that the Government will have to be treated as a favoured litigant, particularly when the Department was manned by persons who are highly interested in seeing that the writ petition succeeded.
Calcutta High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 17 - A Kabir - Full Document

Darjeeling Municipality vs Chadmaku Construction Pvt. Ltd. on 16 December, 1999

He further submitted that the delay should be condoned by this Hon'ble Court and the petitioner should not be penalised from the lapse on the part of its officers and legal advisors. In support of his submissions he relied upon the Judgments (Collector. Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Ors.v. Mst. Katijl &. Ors.) and 1990(2) CLJ 73 (State of West Bengal v. West Bengal Judicial Service Association).
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - P C Ghosh - Full Document

Shri Jagbir Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 20 February, 2013

So far as the decision in West Bengal Judicial Service Association (supra) is concerned, the Court appears to have equated the members of Judicial Services with the members of the All-India Services (AIS), including with regard to their scales of pay, in the facts of this case. With respect, this Court does not see how such broad features can be the basis for issuing directions which can amount to mandating the executive to frame laws in the place of existing rules that have force of law.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S R Bhat - Full Document

Reserved On: 26.02.2026 vs State Of Hp And Another on 3 March, 2026

Again, in State of W.B. v. W.B. Registration Service Assn., the claim of Sub-Registrars of West Bengal Registration Service claiming parity in pay scale with Munsifs on the basis that Sub-Registrars were conferred gazetted status, was examined by rt this Court. It was elaborately observed in SCC para 12 as under:(SCC pp. 165-67) "12. We do not consider it necessary to traverse the case law on which reliance has been placed by counsel for the appellants as it is well settled that equation of posts and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the executive and not the judiciary and, therefore, ordinarily courts will not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to expert bodies like the Pay Commissions, etc. But that is not to say that the Court has no jurisdiction and the aggrieved employees haveno remedy if they are unjustly treated by arbitrary State action or inaction.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next