Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 854 (5.57 seconds)
Documents citing Rattan Lal & Ors. Etc.Etc vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 16 August, 1985

Mrs. Shivani Batra Daughter Of Shri M.L. ... vs Chandigarh Administration on 15 December, 2011

(iii) In view of the categorical law laid down by the learned Coordinate Bench in KRISHAN KUMAR VS. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH & OTHERS (supra) (wherein appropriate sustenance was drawn from the view obtained by the Apex Court in RATTAN LAL & OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI VS. FEMALE WORKERS (MUSTER ROLL) AND ANOTHER(supra), and also a Division Bench ruling of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of RAJ BALA VS. STATE OF HARYANA : 2002(3) RSJ (43) ), all the contractual lecturers shall be entitled to minimum of the pay scale of the post, with Dearness Allowance, as admissible from time to time and also the maternity leave to the extent indicated in that judgment (Krishan Kumars case). The benefit of maternity leave would be available to a female contractual employee, with less than two surviving children. The duration thereof would be the same as has been recommended by the VIth Central Pay Commission.(underlining for emphasis)
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 13 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Vandana Jain D/O Kasturilal Jain Aged 31 ... vs Union Of India Through Secretary To ... on 31 March, 2011

iv)In view of the categorical law laid down by the learned Coordinate Bench in KRISHAN KUMAR VS. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH & OTHERS (supra) (wherein appropriate sustenance was drawn from the view obtained by the Apex Court in RATTAN LAL & OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI VS. FEMALE WORKERS (MUSTER ROLL) AND ANOTHER(supra), and also a Division Bench ruling of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of RAJ BALA VS. STATE OF HARYANA : 2002(3) RSJ (43) ), all the contractual lecturers shall be entitled to minimum of the pay scale of the post, with Dearness Allowance, as admissible from time to time and also the maternity leave to the extent indicated in that judgment (Krishan Kumars case). The benefit of maternity leave would be available to a female contractual employee, with less than two surviving children. The duration thereof would be the same as has been recommended by the VIth Central Pay Commission.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 12 - Cited by 22 - Full Document

Devinder Kumar & Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 25 April, 2026

22. A Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No.415 of 2000 tiled as 'Baldev Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.' along with connected matters vide judgment dated 01.09.2008 reported in Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, after taking into consideration judgments rendered in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1; B.N. Nagarjan & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., (1979) 3 SCR 937; and Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana, (1985) 3 SCC 43, has observed as under:-
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 204 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

Devinder Kumar & Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 25 April, 2026

22. A Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No.415 of 2000 tiled as 'Baldev Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.' along with connected matters vide judgment dated 01.09.2008 reported in Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, after taking into consideration judgments rendered in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1; B.N. Nagarjan & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., (1979) 3 SCR 937; and Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana, (1985) 3 SCC 43, has observed as under:-
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 204 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

Devinder Kumar & Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 25 April, 2026

22. A Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No.415 of 2000 tiled as 'Baldev Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.' along with connected matters vide judgment dated 01.09.2008 reported in Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, after taking into consideration judgments rendered in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1; B.N. Nagarjan & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., (1979) 3 SCR 937; and Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana, (1985) 3 SCC 43, has observed as under:-
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 204 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

Devinder Kumar & Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 25 April, 2026

22. A Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No.415 of 2000 tiled as 'Baldev Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.' along with connected matters vide judgment dated 01.09.2008 reported in Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, after taking into consideration judgments rendered in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1; B.N. Nagarjan & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., (1979) 3 SCR 937; and Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana, (1985) 3 SCC 43, has observed as under:-
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 204 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

Devinder Kumar & Ors vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 25 April, 2026

22. A Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No.415 of 2000 tiled as 'Baldev Singh & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.' along with connected matters vide judgment dated 01.09.2008 reported in Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, after taking into consideration judgments rendered in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Uma Devi & Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1; B.N. Nagarjan & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., (1979) 3 SCR 937; and Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana, (1985) 3 SCC 43, has observed as under:-
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 204 - Cited by 0 - V S Thakur - Full Document

D.Gandhi vs The Deputy Inspector General Of Police on 26 October, 2010

"The above argument of the learned counsel has force. The plaintiff was in perfect normal state of mind and was found smelling of liquor only on close examination of the breath and, therefore, it cannot be said that Kehar Singh was under influence of liquor. Here I may quote Rattan Lal v. The State of Haryana and others (1983 (2) SLR 243). In that case a Constable of a Guard was found having taken liquor. After an enquiry, he was dismissed as the punishing authority found that taking of liquor "was an act of misconduct of the gravest sort" and amounted to gravest indiscipline. The Constable challenged his dismissal order by way of a writ petition in this Court. He had been examined by a doctor who had given the following opinion:-
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - D Hariparanthaman - Full Document

Abin John Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 15 September, 2025

In Rattan Lal v. State of Haryana [(1985) 4 SCC 43], the question which came up for consideration before a Two- Judge Bench of the Apex Court was whether it is open to the State of Haryana to appoint teachers on an ad hoc basis at the commencement of an academic year and terminate their services before the commencement of the next summer vacation, or earlier, to appoint them again on an ad hoc basis at the commencement of next academic year and to terminate their services before the commencement of the succeeding summer vacation or earlier and to continue to do so year after year. A substantial number of such ad hoc appointments were made in the existing vacancies which have remained unfilled for three to four years.
Kerala High Court Cites 40 - Cited by 0 - A Narendran - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next