Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 234 (2.44 seconds)
Documents citing Superintendent Of Post Offices Etc. Etc vs P.K. Rajamma Etc. Etc on 22 April, 1977

S.Raman Pillai vs Union Of India Rep.By on 8 March, 2019

“2. The Extra Departmental Agents system in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs is in vogue since 1854. The object underlying it is to cater to postal needs of the rural communities dispersed in remote areas. The system avails of the services of schoolmasters, shopkeepers, landlords and such other persons in a village who have the faculty of reasonable standard of literacy and adequate means of livelihood and who, therefore, in their leisure can assist the Department by way of gainful avocation and social service in ministering to the rural communities in their postal needs, through maintenance of simple accounts and adherence to minimum procedural formalities, as prescribed by the Department for the purpose. [See: Swamy's Compilation of Service Rules for Extra Departmental Staff in Postal Department p. 1.]” Further, a three-judge Bench of this Court in the case of The Superintendent of Post Offices & Ors. v. P.K. Rajamma[(1977) 3 SCC 94] held as under:
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

O.Ramachandran vs Union Of India on 17 October, 2016

30. We are of the considered view, that the expression civil service and civil posts referred to in Article 311 of the Constitution of India, can be applied, only insofar as protection, to be granted under Article 311 of the Constitution of India, for dismissal, removal, reduction in rank of persons employed in any civil capacity, that no such person shall be punished, unless, he has been given a reasonable opportunity to show cause against the action proposed to be taken against him. No doubt, in Rajamma's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has declared that the post of Extra Departmental Agents, now Gramin Dak Sevak, as a civil post and in Joseph's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also reiterated the same, by declaring them as civil servants, the above said judgments in our opinion, with due respect, cannot be said to have declared the law that Gramin Dak Sevaks are also eligible for pension. At this juncture, this court deems it fit to consider few decisions on law of precedence.
Madras High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - S Manikumar - Full Document

Rupsinh S Thakar vs D/O Post on 28 February, 2022

The decisions in the cases of P.K. Rajamma(supra) and Chet Ram (supra) are for the proposition (CAT/AHMEDABAD BENCH OA NO.242/2019) 12 that the respondents held civil posts as GDS and were government servants. But again ratio of these authorities cannot be applied to combine the services rendered by GDSs in posts guided by an altogether different service rule with their services in regular employment.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ambalal Maganbhai Patel vs D/O Post on 28 February, 2022

The decisions in the cases of P.K. Rajamma(supra) and Chet Ram (supra) are for the proposition that the respondents held civil posts as GDS and were government servants. But again ratio of these authorities cannot be applied to combine the services rendered by GDSs in posts guided by an altogether different service rule with their services in regular employment.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mansukhlal Mohandas Kubavat vs D/O Post on 28 February, 2022

The decisions in the cases of P.K. Rajamma(supra) and Chet Ram (supra) are for the proposition that the respondents held civil posts as GDS and were government servants. But again ratio of these authorities cannot be applied to combine the services rendered by GDSs in posts guided by an altogether different service 12 (CAT/AHMEDABAD BENCH/OA No.470/2017) rule with their services in regular employment.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Hasan Budhabhai Sumra vs D/O Post on 28 February, 2022

The decisions in the cases of P.K. Rajamma(supra) and Chet Ram (supra) are for the proposition (CAT/AHMEDABAD BENCH OA NO.267/2019) 12 that the respondents held civil posts as GDS and were government servants. But again ratio of these authorities cannot be applied to combine the services rendered by GDSs in posts guided by an altogether different service rule with their services in regular employment.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chhaganbhai Chauhan vs D/O Post on 28 February, 2022

The decisions in the cases of P.K. Rajamma(supra) and Chet Ram (supra) are for the proposition that the respondents held civil posts as GDS and were government servants. But again ratio of these authorities cannot be applied to combine the services rendered by GDSs in posts guided by an altogether different service rule with their services in regular employment.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next