Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.59 seconds)
Documents citing P G I Employee Union Group B C And D ... vs Pgi Chandigarh on 6 February, 2019

Sanjeev Batish vs State Of Haryana And Others on 21 November, 2024

The learned Tribunal noted that the additional charge was given to respondent No.2 on account of his seniority and efficiency. It was not the case of the Administration that while discharging the additional responsibility of Sub Divisional Engineer, his functioning as such was curtailed in any manner in terms of authority and powers of Sub Divisional Engineer. In other words, his working on the additional charge was as good as regular charge. The Tribunal further noted that the applicable Rule does not rule out an interpretation that an additional charge or current duty charge could not be taken as experience for promotion. Reliance was placed on D.P.Mehta (Dr.) vs. PGI and its Governing Body RSJ 1997(1) 503, wherein, this Court directed that the experience gained by the petitioner therein who was given additional charge of Deputy Medical Superintendent be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of Joint 17 of 20 ::: Downloaded on - 30-11-2024 08:13:11 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153711 CWP-10291-2023 (O&M) 18 Medical Superintendent. It was held that where the rule does not specifically postulate the requirement of experience of having worked on regular basis consideration could not be denied only on the ground that the incumbent only had additional charge of the post. Accordingly, the Original Application was allowed.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh Dr Umashanker Singh vs Information And Broadcasting on 7 August, 2025

The learned Tribunal noted that the additional charge was given to respondent No.2 on account of his seniority and efficiency. It was not the case of the Administration that while discharging the additional responsibility of Sub Divisional Engineer, his functioning as such was curtailed in any manner in terms of authority and powers of Sub Divisional Engineer. In other words, his working on the additional charge was as good as regular charge. The Tribunal further noted that the applicable Rule does not rule out an interpretation that an additional charge or current duty charge could not be taken as experience for promotion. Reliance was placed on D.P.Mehta (Dr.) vs. PGI and its Governing Body RSJ 1997(1) 503, wherein, this Court directed that the experience gained by the petitioner therein who was given additional charge of Deputy Medical Superintendent be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of Joint Medical Superintendent. It was held that where the rule does not specifically postulate the requirement of experience of having worked on regular basis consideration could not be denied only on the ground that the incumbent only 15 C-3/Item-1 OA-2988/2024 had additional charge of the post. Accordingly, the Original Application was allowed."
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1