Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing Asi Dev Dutt & Anr vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 20 July, 2010

Baldev Singh Pawar vs State Of Punjab And Others on 25 November, 2011

Mr. Gazi Mohd. Umair, learned counsel for the State does not Civil Writ Petition No. 11221 of 2009 -6- dispute the settled preposition of law that even if there is a gap of beyond 3 years the benefit as contemplated under Section 4(1) of the Punjab National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965 is to be given to an ex-Army personnel for the purpose of seniority, pension and increments. By applying the ratio by this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI versus State of Punjab and others (supra) and Bhagwant Singh versus State of Punjab and others (supra) as per Rule 4.6(a)(5) if there was a break between military service and the civil post was liable to be condoned. Section 4.6(a) is absolute in nature. War service was liable to be counted towards civil pension subject to certain conditions. Only on the ground that the gap was more than one year, the benefit was not to be wiped out. As per Rule 4.3 if any gratuity was paid by the military service that was liable to be returned back and he should not have earned a pension.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

Raj Pal Gupta vs State Of Haryana And Others on 25 November, 2011

While applying these rules to the facts of the present case, the case of the petitioner, he was discharged from the Air Force on 28.8.1974, thereafter,he joined as lecturer of Political Science on adhoc basis on 23.7.1975 and thereafter he was appointed on regular basis w.e.f. 13.8.1976. As per Rule 4.3(b) Civil Writ Petition No. 11903 of 2002 -7- Note 2 he should have been confirmed on a civil post 12 months prior to the date of his discharge. The limit was relaxable by the competent authority only in exceptional cases. However, in the present case, there is a gap of almost two years between the date of his discharge and appointment as lecturer on regular basis. By applying the ratio by this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI versus State of Punjab and others (supra) and Bhagwant Singh versus State of Punjab and others (supra) as per Rule 4.6(a)(5) if there was a break between military service and the civil post was liable to be condoned. Section 4.6(a) is absolute in nature. War service was liable to be counted towards civil pension subject to certain conditions. Only on the ground that the gap was more than one year, the benefit was not to be wiped out. As per Rule 4.3 if any gratuity was paid by the military service that was liable to be returned back and he should not have earned a pension.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

Santokh Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 25 November, 2011

However, in the present case, there is a gap of almost two years between the date of his discharge and appointment as lecturer on regular basis. By applying the ratio by this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI versus State of Punjab and others (supra) and Bhagwant Singh versus State of Punjab and others (supra) as per Rule 4.6(a)(5) if there was a break between military service and the civil post was liable to be condoned. Section 4.6(a) is absolute in nature. War service was liable to be counted towards civil pension subject to certain conditions. Only on the ground that the gap was more than one year, the benefit was not to be wiped out. As per Rule 4.3 if any gratuity was paid by the military service that was liable to be returned back and he should not have earned a pension.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

Manjit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 25 November, 2011

While applying these rules to the facts of the present case, the case of the petitioner, he was discharged from the Air Force on 28.8.1974, thereafter,he joined as lecturer of Political Science on adhoc basis on 23.7.1975 and thereafter he was appointed on regular basis w.e.f. 13.8.1976. As per Rule 4.3(b) Note 2 he should have been confirmed on a civil post 12 months prior to the date of his discharge. The limit was relaxable by the competent authority only in exceptional cases. However, in the present case, there is a gap of almost two years between the date of his discharge and appointment as lecturer on regular basis. By applying the ratio by this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI Civil Writ Petition No. 9624 of 2006 -7- versus State of Punjab and others (supra) and Bhagwant Singh versus State of Punjab and others (supra) as per Rule 4.6(a)(5) if there was a break between military service and the civil post was liable to be condoned. Section 4.6(a) is absolute in nature. War service was liable to be counted towards civil pension subject to certain conditions. Only on the ground that the gap was more than one year, the benefit was not to be wiped out. As per Rule 4.3 if any gratuity was paid by the military service that was liable to be returned back and he should not have earned a pension.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

State Of Punjab And Another vs Santokh Singh Bhinder And Others on 4 October, 2012

In so far as the second contention of the appellants is concerned, the same has already been repelled by a Division Bench of this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI Vs State of Punjab and others, 1996 (7) SLR 807, holding that the period mentioned in Sub Rule 3 of 1965 Rules refers to the period of discharge from military service LPA No. 777 of 2012 (O&M) -4- till the appointment in the civil service and the Division Bench interpreted this provision in the said case in the following manner:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

State Of Punjab And Another vs Baldev Singh Pawar And Others on 4 October, 2012

In so far as the second contention of the appellants is concerned, the same has already been repelled by a Division Bench of this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI Vs State of Punjab and others, 1996 (7) SLR 807, holding that the period mentioned in Sub Rule 3 of 1965 Rules refers to the period of discharge from military service LPA No. 776 of 2012 (O&M) -4- till the appointment in the civil service and the Division Bench interpreted this provision in the said case in the following manner:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ajmer Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 25 November, 2011

In view of Dev Dutt's case (supra) he is entitled to the benefit of military service rendered during emergency for pension etc. The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 3.2.2010 (Annexure P-9) is quashed and a direction is given C.W.P. No.5241 of 2010 [ 12 ] to the respondents to count the period of service with effect from 26.10.1962 to 12.8.1965 for the purpose of increments, seniority and pension etc. The process of consideration be completed within a period of 3 months and consequential retiral benefits be released to the petitioner within three months from retirement till the amount is actually paid. Arrears shall be restricted to 38 months from the date of filing the writ petition. No order as to costs.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 6 - R Bahri - Full Document

Sohan Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 25 November, 2011

While applying these rules to the facts of the present case, the case of the petitioner, he was discharged from the Navy on 31.3.1983, thereafter,he joined the Himachal Government from August 1983 to June 1988 and thereafter on 09.6.1988 joined as Marine Fitter in BBMB. As per Rule 4.3(b) Note 2 he should have been confirmed on a civil post 12 months prior to the date of his discharge. The limit was relaxable by the competent authority only in exceptional cases. However, in the present case, there is a gap of almost two years between the date of his Civil Writ Petition No. 14701 of 2000 -10- discharge and appointment as lecturer on regular basis. By applying the ratio by this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI versus State of Punjab and others (supra) and Bhagwant Singh versus State of Punjab and others (supra) as per Rule 4.6(a)(5) if there was a break between military service and the civil post was liable to be condoned. Section 4.6(a) is absolute in nature. War service was liable to be counted towards civil pension subject to certain conditions. Only on the ground that the gap was more than one year, the benefit was not to be wiped out. As per Rule 4.3 if any gratuity was paid by the military service that was liable to be returned back and he should not have earned a pension.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

Chuni Lal Dogra vs Bhakhra Beas Management Board Through ... on 25 November, 2011

While applying these rules to the facts of the present case, the case of the petitioner, he was discharged from the Navy on 31.3.1983, thereafter,he joined the Himachal Government from August 1983 to June 1988 and thereafter on 09.6.1988 joined as Marine Fitter in BBMB. As per Rule 4.3(b) Note 2 he should have been confirmed on a civil post 12 months prior to the date of his discharge. The limit was relaxable by the competent authority only in exceptional cases. However, in the present case, there is a gap of almost two years between the date of his discharge and appointment as lecturer on regular basis. By applying the ratio by this Court in Dev Dutt, ASI versus State of Punjab and others (supra) and Bhagwant Singh versus State of Punjab and others (supra) as per Rule 4.6(a)(5) if there was a break between military service and the civil post was liable to be condoned. Section 4.6(a) is absolute in nature. War service was liable to be counted towards civil pension subject to certain conditions. Only on the ground that the gap was more than one year, the benefit was not to be wiped out. As per Rule 4.3 if any gratuity was paid by the military service that was liable to be returned back and he should not have earned a pension.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document
1   2 Next