Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.57 seconds)

Anujit Kaur vs Education Deptt., Ut Chandigarh on 24 December, 2019

8. Mr. Arvind Moudgil, Advocate, learned counsel for the official respondents, on the basis of the affidavit of Mr. 8 [O.A.NO.060/01221/2019] Rubinderjit Singh Brar, PCS, Director School Education, Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh, (Respondent No.3), argued that pay scales of all the three posts i.e. DDEO-II, DDEO-I and DEO are the same i.e. Rs.15600-39100+5500 GP (on Punjab pattern) and are, therefore, inter changeable, considering the exigencies of work / administrative grounds. They have same feeder cadre and salary of posts is being met from State budget of U.T. Chandigarh. It is submitted that earlier a similar O.A. No. 415-CH-2007 was dismissed by this Tribunal on 19.7.2007 and another O.A. No. 954/CH/2003 filed by Dr. Saubhagya Vardhan Vs. UOI etc. was also dismissed on 8.4.2004. It is argued that transfer is an incident of service and cannot be interfered by a court of law. He submits that the relief claimed by the applicant, as an interim relief, is in the nature of final relief which cannot be granted at all. He further argued that Ms. Alka Mehta, was not even a party in the O.A. earlier filed and as such no order adverse to her interest could be passed by this Tribunal.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vansh Saroa vs Vice Chancellor, University Of Delhi & ... on 15 February, 2021

[W.P.(C) 2275/2010, decided on 01.08.2014] and of a Coordinate Bench in Saubhagya Dua vs. Union of India & Anr. [W.P.(C) 8303/2019, decided on 13.08.2019], this Court held that the University cannot be directed to fill up seats which have become vacant due to candidates not taking up the seats after admission, as it would render the counselling and admission process entirely incapable of conclusion. The said reasoning applies to the present case as well.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - P Jalan - Full Document
1