Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (1.89 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Punjab And Another vs Amarjit Kaur on 25 January, 2023

G Sarada vs South Central Railway on 21 June, 2024

15. The applicant has also relied on the judgments of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in G.Uma Sankar v. The Superintending Engineer dated 30.03.2015. and the Allahabad High Court in Smt.Vimla Srivastava v. State of U.P. and Another in Writ © No.60881/2015 & batch, dated 04.12.2015, and contended that rejecting her case for compassionate appointment on the ground of „married daughter‟ is liable to be set aside as arbitrary, illegal, discrimination and in clear violation of the applicant‟s fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and also against the law laid by P a g e | 7 of 10 OA.No.020/36/2023 the Hon‟ble High Court of Punjab &Haryana in State of Punjab v. Amarjit Kaur dated 25.01.2023 and the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.10340/2014, dated 26.02.2021 in Ch.Dhamayanthi v. APSRTC.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Harmeet Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 April, 2026

16), on the ground that married daughter is not eligible for compassionate appointment. He further submits that in the representation dated 17.08.2023 (Annexure P-15), the petitioner has given reference of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP-2218- 2017 titled as 'Amarjit Kaur Vs. State of Punjab and another' decided VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.04.07 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-10242-2026 2 on 17.01.2020 (Annexure P-12), wherein, while dealing with the similar issue, this Court has held that the married daughters are also entitled for compassionate appointment and the said judgment has been upheld in LPA-462-2021 titled as 'State of Punjab and another Vs. Amarjit Kaur' decided on 25.01.2023 (Annexure P-13) and further upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He further submits that the said judgment has not been considered by the respondents while rejecting the claim of the petitioner. He further submits that in pursuance to the said judgments, the State Government, vide letter dated 29.01.2024, has amended the instructions for grant of compassionate appointment by amending provision in Note 1(c) of para 3 of the instructions, which reads as under :-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ritika Pathania vs State Of Punjab And Others on 14 September, 2023

1. Both the counsels are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition with regard to the maintainability of an application for compassionate appointment by a married daughter stands already adjudicated by this Court in LPA-462-2021 in State of Punjab and another vs. Amarjit Kaur decided on 25.01.2023, and CWP-24591-2021 in Jaspreet Kaur vs. State of Punjab and others decided on 24.07.2023.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S P Sharma - Full Document

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. And ... vs Sonia on 20 January, 2024

3. The respondent was married daughter and as per the impugned order dated 01.06.2017 (Annexure P-7), her claim for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected on the ground of being a married 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 24-01-2024 22:53:46 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:008204-DB LPA-743-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:008204-DB -2- daughter. Vide order dated 06.02.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, her petition has been allowed keeping in view the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in State of Punjab and another vs. Amarjit Kaur, LPA No.462 of 2021, whereby it was held that even the married daughter has a right to be considered under the policy and her claim cannot be rejected merely on the ground of being married.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

Simranjeet Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 14 February, 2024

2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been denied the compassionate appointment on account of her mother having passed away who were working as Superintendent in the Finance Department without giving any reasons therein. It is her categoric case that there are lot of liabilities upon the petitioner who is the only daughter, though she is married, however, there being no sibling and her father, who was in employment but has voluntary retired due to his ill health. She relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in LPA No.462 of 2021 (State of Punjab and another versus Amarjit Kaur) decided on 25.01.2023 wherein it has held that even a married daughter falls within the definition of 'Family'. These aspects have not been taken into consideration by the competent authority. She prays that liberty be granted to 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 19-02-2024 23:46:18 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:021222 CWP-13214-2021 -2- 2024:PHHC: 021222 her to bring to the notice of the authorities all these facts supported by documents to substantiate, for which she would file a representation/legal notice within four weeks. He thus, at this stage, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is sanguine of it being considered in a positive manner, in case, a direction is given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner by granting her an opportunity of hearing.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next