Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.47 seconds)
Documents citing Megh Varan Sharma vs State Of U.P.. on 9 September, 2014

Vn Gaur vs Haryana State & Ors on 12 May, 2015

The payment of the plaintiff has been made during the pendency of the suit hence the grant of 9% per annum from the date of retirement of the plaintiff till actual payment is reasonable and therefore, does not require any interference. At this stage, reference can be made to a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Megh Varan Sharma vs. State of U.P and others 2015 (1) SCT 12, wherein the retiral benefits were released after eight years despite the fact that none of the issues on the basis of which benefits were withheld had been resolved. It was held that the action of withholding the same was unjustified. Appellant was held entitled to the highest of the maximum rate at which scheduled Banks at that time were paying interest on fixed deposits.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document

Association Of College And University ... vs Union Of India And Others on 6 April, 2016

8] The learned counsel appearing for ::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2016 00:01:25 ::: 5206.2014 WP.odt 10 the petitioner in support of his contention that, the petitioners are entitled for the interest on delayed payment of the enhanced gratuity amount pressed into service exposition of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Megh Varan Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.1, S.K.Dua Vs. State of Haryana and Anr.2, State of Kerala and Ors. Vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair3, R.Kapur Vs. Director of Inspection (Painting and Publication) Income Tax and Anr.4 and The President /Secretary, Vidarbha Youth Welfare Institution (Society) Vs. Shri. Pradipkumar s/o Ramchandrarao Lambhate5.
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S S Shinde - Full Document

Ranbir Singh vs Ashok Garg And Others on 19 November, 2025

3. When confronted as to under what circumstances the benchmark was fixed as 30.04.2016, whereas the direction of the coordinate Bench while allowing the writ petition was very clear, so is the dictum in D.D. Tewari (D) through LRs vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others, 2014 AIR (SC) 2861; and Megh Varan Sharma vs. State of U.P and others, 2015 (1) S.C.T (12), learned counsel for the respondents prays for some time to seek instructions and submit an additional affidavit. Adjourned to 19.11.2025."
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Secretary, Punjab State Electricity ... vs Jaspal Singh on 16 May, 2017

The judgment in appeal awarding 18% per annum interest on delayed payment of money due on retirement runs counter to the aforesaid provision of law as applied and interpreted in Megh Varan Sharma's case arising in similar facts and circumstances. The question of law is answered in the same terms as in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the main case.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - R N Raina - Full Document
1