Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.64 seconds)
Documents citing Mohd. Khan Durrany vs The Principal (Tulsi Ram) Shivaji ... on 14 October, 1970

Dr. Lokesh Sharma vs Union Of India & Anr. on 17 February, 2022

50. Respondent No.2 also contended that Petitioner was an employee of the University, a Central University, receiving grant and controlled by UGC, funded by the Central Government from the Consolidated Fund of India and is thus governed by the Pension Rules. In this context, it would be relevant to examine the source of pension of the Petitioner and the nature of fund of UGC. The University Grants Commission Act, 1956, was enacted to make provision for coordination and determination of standards in Universities. Section 16 of the said Act provides that the Commission shall have its own fund and all sums which 'may', from time to time, be paid to it by the Central Government shall be carried to the Fund and all payments by the Commission shall be made therefrom. Section 12 of the Act deals with functions of the Commission and W.P.(C) 6928/2020 Page 32 of 35 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KUMAR Signing Date:21.02.2022 10:38:06 Sub-Section (e) provides that the Commission shall advise the Central Government or any State Government of the allocation of any grants to the Universities for any general or specified purpose out of the Consolidated Fund of India or of the State, as the case may be. A Full Bench of this Court in Mohd. Khan Durrany (Dr.) v. Principal (Tulsi Ram) Shivaji College, 1970 SCC OnLine Del 235, held that UGC is a Statutory body created under the UGC Act and distinct from the Government of India. Under Section 16 of the said Act, the Fund of the Commission is separate from the Consolidated Fund of India. Relevant para is as follows:-
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document

Praduman Kumar Jain vs All India Institute Of Medical Sciences ... on 19 August, 1971

However, questions similar to the questions raised in this appeal came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court in Durrany's case referred .'to earlier. Durrany was appointed as a lecturer in the Shivaji College. His services were terminated by the Governing Body of the Corporation. Durrany filed a writ in this Court challenging the validity of his termination on the ground that (1) his appointment was permanent and was not temporary or on probation (2) he was governed by the terms of the form of service agreement embodied in the Delhi University accordance Xii as the Shivaji College was a Government maintained college and, under the Ordinance his services could be terminated only for misconduct or with three months' notice and for good cause and after affording him an opportunity to show cause and (3) the Principal of the College was biased against him and terminated his services mala fide and by way of punishment.
Delhi High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Indian Institute Of Technology vs Mangat Singh on 29 March, 1973

In Dr Mohd. Khan Durany V. The Principal, Shivji College 2nd (1970) Ii Delhi 414, (9) a Fulll Bench of this Court denied reinstatetement to the petitioner firstly because his service was rightly terminated by a notice as he was only a probationer and secondly because the terms of his employment had to be according to the prescribed form of the service contract set out in Ordinance Xii which made them dominantly contractual and not statutory.
Delhi High Court Cites 62 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Lachhman Dass Aggarwal vs Punjab National Bank, Etc. on 14 April, 1978

and Indian Airlines Corporation v. Sukhdeo Rai, , and a Full Bench decision of this court in Dr. Mohd. Khan Durrany v. The Principal, Shivaji College, 2nd (1970) 2 Delhi 414(3), made it doubtful if the petitioner could establish that the petition was maintainable on the ground that statutory rights of the petitioner were contravened by the illegality of the reversion order.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Prof. Ramesh Chandra vs University Of Delhi & Ors. on 1 March, 2012

Another Full Bench of this Court in Dr. Mohd. Khan Durrany Vs. The Principal, Shivaji College ILR (1970) II Delhi 414 held that the appointment of a lecturer, in that case in a College functioning under the Delhi University is dominantly W.P.(C)2547/2010 Page 25 of 40 contractual and the teachers do not hold a statutory office and have not been given a legislative status; termination of their service in contravention of model conditions of service cannot be said to be violation of mandatory statutory obligation and the remedy for such wrongful termination is therefore, by way of damages and not by way of reinstatement.
Delhi High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 2 - R S Endlaw - Full Document
1