Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.70 seconds)
Documents citing Union Of India & Ors vs Kashiswar Jana on 31 March, 2008

K.Laxmi Narsaiah, Nalgoanda District. vs Union Of India New Delhi, And Another on 2 May, 2018

It is also specifically stated that in UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. KAUSHALYA DEVI2 and UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS v. KASHISWAR JANA3. The Apex Court has clearly laid down the principles that in cases where claim is allowed on the basis of oral statement of some other co-workers, and not on the basis of document based records, the pension should be granted from the date of order. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for pension from the date of the order but not from the date of the application. 1 (1993) Supp (3) SCC 2 2 (2007) 9 SCC 525 3 (2008) 11 SCC 309 6 PKR, J
Telangana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Major (Now Lt. Col.) Z A Khan And 9 Ors vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 24 January, 2020

Mr. R. Balasubramanian, learned Senior counsel, submits, besides the above averments made in the application, that in a similarly situated case the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CC No. 14702/2015 (Union of India & Anr. Vs. Jana & Anr.) directed the newly impleaded party, namely Brig. Kishore Malhotra shall not be arrested by the police authorities, but he will participate in the enquiry and co-operate with the investigating agency. Mr. Balasubramanian, therefore, contends that similar order may be passed in the instant petition.
Gauhati High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - A Borthakur - Full Document

Sec.To Govt.Of India vs Sawinder Kaur & Anr on 21 March, 2013

In Union of India & others v. Kashiswar Jana[9], the issue arose from which date the respondent therein was entitled to pension. In the said case, the pension was released w.e.f 4.8.1993. The claim of the respondent was that he was entitled to the pension from the date of the application which was allowed by the High Court directing that pension should be awarded from the date of application, i.e., 28.7.1981.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 4 - D Misra - Full Document

State Of Punjab And Others vs Muktiar Singh And Another on 8 December, 2008

To the same effect is the decision in Kashiswar Jana's case (supra), in which also, the Supreme Court has relying upon Kaushalaya Devi's decision and that rendered in K.V.Swaminathan's case, allowed the appeal filed by the Union of India and set aside the order passed by the High Court directing payment of pension with the modification that the pension shall be paid from the date of order granting the pension and not from the date of the application.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Major (Now Lt. Col.) Z A Khan vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 3 January, 2020

Mr. R. Balasubramanian, learned Senior counsel, submits, besides the above averments made in the application, that in a similarly situated case the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CC No. 14702/2015 (Union of India & Anr. Vs. Jana & Anr.) directed the newly impleaded party, namely Brig. Kishore Malhotra shall not be arrested by the police authorities, but he will participate in the enquiry and co- operate with the investigating agency. Mr. Balasubramanian, therefore, contends that similar order may be passed in the instant petition.
Gauhati High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A Borthakur - Full Document

Joginder Singh vs Union Of India And Others on 22 March, 2014

3. Both sides rely on the same authorities holding on the issue of commencement of period from which the calculation ought to be made. They lay down that if the High Court passes the order specifying a particular date from when it should commence that itself will govern the issue. In other cases it should be understood where there existed a doubt regarding the pensioner's entitlement and the benefit of doubt is given to the status of the person as a freedom fighter then it should be only from the date of the order of the High Court. Three decisions have been cited by the CM No. 3580-CWP of 2014 in 3 CM No. 659 of 2014 in CWP No. 18124 of 2011 counsel for the Union namely Union of India and another Vs. Kaushalaya Devi (2007) 9 SCC 525, Union of India and others Vs. Kashiswar Jana (2008) 11 SCC 309 and Government of India Vs. K. V. Swaminathan (1997) 10 SCC 190 that bring out this aspect of how when there exists a doubt regarding the status of a person as a freedom fighter and the Court makes an adjudication uphold the status and consequently the entitlement, it shall be only from the date of the order of the High Court.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - K Kannan - Full Document
1   2 Next