Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 49 (1.09 seconds)
Documents citing State Bank Of Bikaner & Jaipur & Others vs Jag Mohan Lal on 13 September, 1988

Sadhna Mittal vs Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sirsa, ... on 12 July, 2021

In judgment of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and others vs. Jag Mohan Lal, 1989 AIR (SC) 75, it was held by Hon'ble the Apex Court that right of extension in service is not a legal right but it is a benefit, however, this benefit is not a concession but is a privilege, to which, an officer is entitled to after years of hard work in the respondent-Bank.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - H S Sethi - Full Document

Romesh Garg vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 24 April, 2015

"8. It is true that in establishments like AIIMS, there is an age of superannuation governing the length of service of its officers and employees. Such age of superannuation may be suitably altered by way of reducing the age so as to affect even the serving employees under appropriate circumstances and no exception can be taken to such course of action. Similarly under the Service Rules, there may be provision for extension of service after the attainment of the age of superannuation and it is well settled that in the event of refusal by an employer to grant an extension, the employee cannot MONIKA 2015.04.24 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. Nos. 3826 and 5215 of 2015 14 justifiably claim to be deprived of any right or privilege. The view taken is that the employer has a discretion to grant or not to grant such extension having regard to the interest of the employer or the establishment. This view is expressed by this Court in the Case of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and Ors. vs. Jag Mohan Lal (AIR 1989 SC 75). In this case, at AIR para 12, this Court observed as follows :
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 23 - D Sibal - Full Document

Iqbal Mohammad vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 24 April, 2015

"8. It is true that in establishments like AIIMS, there is an age of superannuation governing the length of service of its officers and employees. Such age of superannuation may be suitably altered by way of reducing the age so as to affect even the serving employees under appropriate circumstances and no exception can be taken to such course of action. Similarly under the Service Rules, there may be provision for extension of service after the attainment of the age of superannuation and it is well settled that in the event of refusal by an employer to grant an extension, the employee cannot MONIKA 2015.04.24 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 3847 of 2015 and connected matters 15 justifiably claim to be deprived of any right or privilege. The view taken is that the employer has a discretion to grant or not to grant such extension having regard to the interest of the employer or the establishment. This view is expressed by this Court in the Case of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and Ors. vs. Jag Mohan Lal (AIR 1989 SC 75). In this case, at AIR para 12, this Court observed as follows :
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 7 - D Sibal - Full Document

Shashi Pal vs State Of Punjab on 31 March, 2015

"8. It is true that in establishments like AIIMS, there is an age of superannuation governing the length of service of its officers and employees. Such age of superannuation may be suitably altered by way of reducing the age so as to affect even the serving employees under appropriate circumstances and no exception can be taken to such course of action. MONIKA 2015.04.01 11:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. Nos. 17038 and 23764 of 2013 25 Similarly, under the service rules, there may be provision for extension of service after the attainment of the age of superannuation and it is well settled that in the event of refusal by an employer to grant an extension, the employee cannot justifiably claim to be deprived of any right or privilege. The view taken is that the employer has a discretion to grant or not to grant such extension having regard to the interest of the employer or the establishment. This view was expressed by this Court in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur v. Jag Mohan Lal. In this case, at AIR para 12, this Court observed as follows:
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 4 - D Sibal - Full Document

Lal Chand Goyal vs Punjab State Agricultural Marketing ... on 11 February, 2014

8. It is true that in establishments like AIIMS, there is an age of superannuation governing the length of service of its officers and employees. Such age of superannuation may be suitably altered by way of reducing the age so as to affect even the serving employees under appropriate circumstances and no exception can be taken to such course of action. Similarly, under the service rules, there may be provision for extension of service after the attainment of the age of superannuation and it is well settled that in the event of refusal by an employer to grant an extension, the employee cannot justifiably claim to be deprived of any right or privilege. The view taken is that the employer has a discretion to grant or not to grant such extension having regard to the interest of the employer or the establishment. This view was expressed by this Court in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur v. Jag Mohan Lal. In this case, at AIR para 12, this Court observed as follows: (SCC p. 226, para 13) "13. ... The Bank has no obligation to extend the services of all officers even if they are found suitable in every respect. The interest of the Bank is the primary consideration for giving extension of service. With due regard to exigencies of service, the Bank in one year may give extension to all suitable retiring officers. In another year, it may give extension to some and not to all. In a subsequent year, it may not give extension to any one of the officers. The Bank may have a lot of fresh recruits in one year. The Atul Kumar Tripathi 2014.03.07 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No. 11994 of 2013 and other connected case -21- Bank may not need the services of all retired persons in another year. The Bank may have lesser workload in a succeeding year. The retiring persons cannot in any year demand 'extension to all or none'. If we concede that right to retiring persons, then the very purpose of giving extension in the interest of the Bank would be defeated. We are, therefore, of opinion that there is no scope for complaining of arbitrariness in the matter of giving extension of service to retiring persons."
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 12 - H S Sidhu - Full Document

Nek Chand vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 23 February, 2023

"8. It is true that in establishments like AIIMS, there is an age of 4 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 03-03-2023 01:59:38 ::: Neutral Citation No:= CWP No.14053 of 2017 (O&M) 5 superannuation governing the length of service of its officers and employees. Such age of superannuation may be suitably altered by way of reducing the age so as to affect even the serving employees under appropriate circumstances and no exception can be taken to such course of action. Similarly, under the service rules, there may be provision for extension of service after the attainment of the age of superannuation and it is well settled that in the event of refusal by an employer to grant an extension, the employee cannot justifiably claim to be deprived of any right or privilege. The view taken is that the employer has a discretion to grant or not to grant such extension having regard to the interest of the employer or the establishment. This view was expressed by this Court in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur v. Jag Mohan Lal. In this case, at AIR para 12, this Court observed as follows: (SCC p. 226, para 13) "13. ... The Bank has no obligation to extend the services of all officers even if they are found suitable in every respect. The interest of the Bank is the primary consideration for giving extension of service. With due regard to exigencies of service, the Bank in one year may give extension to all suitable retiring officers. In another year, it may give extension to some and not to all. In a subsequent year, it may not give extension to any one of the officers. The Bank may have a lot of fresh recruits in one year. The Bank may not need the services of all retired persons in another year. The Bank may have lesser workload in a succeeding year. The retiring persons cannot in any year demand 'extension to all or none'. If we concede that right to retiring persons, then the very purpose of giving extension in the interest of the Bank would be defeated. We are, therefore, of opinion that there is no scope for complaining of arbitrariness in the matter of giving extension of service to retiring persons."
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - P Jain - Full Document

Dr M G Shivakumar Babu vs Employees State Insurance Corporation ... on 29 August, 2025

"8. It is true that in establishments like AIMS, there is an age of superannuation governing the length of service of its officers and employees. Such age of superannuation may be suitably altered by way of reducing the age so as to affect even the serving employees under appropriate circumstances and no exception can be taken to such course of action. Similarly, under the service rules, there may be provision for extension of service after the attainment of the age of superannuation and it is well settled that in the event of refusal by an employer to grant an extension, the employee cannot justifiably claim to be deprived of any right or privilege. The view taken is that the employer has a discretion to grant or not to grant such extension having regard to the interest of the employer or the establishment. This view was expressed by this Court in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur v. Jag Mohan Lal. In this case, at AIR para 12, this Court observed as follows: (SCC p.226, para
Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

West Bengal Headmasters' Association ... vs State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 8 May, 1990

In the case of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and Ors. v. Jog Mohan Lal (supra) the Supreme Court after examining its own decision in (supra) and several other decisions of the Supreme Court held that a Government servant has no right to continue in service beyond the age of superannuation and if he is retained beyond that age, it is only in exercise of the discretion of the Government. This matter related to the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 and it was held that beyond the age of superannuation no officer has right to remain in service unless his service is extended by the Bank and everything was left at the discretion of the Bank. It was further held by the Supreme Court tnat if the Bank considers that the service of an officer is not required beyond superannuation, it is an end of the matter. It is no reflection on the officer and carries no stigma.
Calcutta High Court Cites 44 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next