Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 77 (3.41 seconds)

Ajit Singh Januja & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 1 March, 1996

So far the appellants are concerned, they took a stand before the High Court in writ petitions filed on their behalf that when the reservation quota was completes the Scheduled Castes candidates should not further be appointed/promoted. It was said on their behalf that Scheduled Castes and Backward Class candidates who compete on merit, should also be adjusted against the quota reserved for them, otherwise there shall be increase in the percentage of the quota reserved for them. The writ petitions were referred to a Full Bench of the said High Court. Before Full Bench it was also submitted that Scheduled Castes and Backward Class candidates cannot be considered for appointment/promotion against general category posts in a cadre. The Full Bench however said in the case of Jaswant Singh vs. The Secretary to Govt. of Punjab, (1989) 4 SLR 257 that non-consideration of Scheduled Castes candidates against general category posts for purpose of appointment or promotion will be hit by Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution. It also observed that there was no bar to the appointment/promotion of larger number of members of Scheduled Castes. The members of the Scheduled Castes, appointed on merit or promoted on seniority-cum- fitness basis shall not be taken into consideration for working out the reserved percentage. The High Court also said that roster points were seniority points.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 186 - N P Singh - Full Document

Ajit Singh And Ors vs The State Of Punjab And Ors on 16 September, 1999

The various rulings relied upon in Jagdishlal do not, in our opinion, support the conclusions arrived at in that case. Some of these rulings were those where it was held that mere empanelment in a seniority list would not confer a right to promotion. Some other cases relied upon were cases where it was held that mere chances of promotions were not `conditions of service' which were protected. So far as the cases which held that mere inclusion of a name in a panel did not create any right to promotion, there could be no quarrel with the said proposition.
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - M J Rao - Full Document

Ajit Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 16 September, 1999

The various rulings relied upon in Jagdishlal do not, in our opinion, support the conclusions arrived at in that case. Some of these rulings were those where it was held that mere empanelment in a seniority list would not confer a right to promotion. Some other cases relied upon were cases where it was held that mere chances of promotions were not `conditions of service' which were protected. So far as the cases which held that mere inclusion of a name in a panel did not create any right to promotion, there could be no quarrel with the said proposition.
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 601 - M J Rao - Full Document

Jagdish Lal & Ors vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 7 May, 1997

It did not lay down any separaterule inthat behalf.In that case it was not brought to the notice of this Court the existence of operation ofthe service conditions andseniority rulelike Rule 11 of the Rule in this case ineach grade/cadre or services in Punjab & HaryanaSecretariat service orCivil Services.On the other hand, this Court was invited to deal with the circular letter issued by the Punjab & Haryana Government, on the subjectof reservationrules.The primary question before the Full Benchof Punjab & Haryana High Court in Jaswant Singh v. Secretary, Govt. of Punjab & Haryana [1990 (4) SLR 257] was whether the reservedcandidates wereeligible for consideration for promotion to the general vacancies? It was held that theywere entitled.The further question was :
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next