Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (1.45 seconds)

Kavita Gulati Batra vs Union Of India Through Its on 17 December, 2013

1987 was to be followed scrupulously, the University could not have granted subsequent option of switch over. But 2469 employees were allowed to ―come over‖ to GPF after the cut-off date. Going by various communications placed before the Court, such employees were allowed full benefits under GPF. The case of the present respondent employees was not, in any way, different from such 2469 employees. 34.3. The University being a Central University, its employees would rank on similar footing as that of the organisations like IITs and AIIMS. If extensions were granted to employees of the IITs, the employees of the University were also entitled to similar benefit. 34.4. The Division Bench was, therefore, justified in setting aside the view taken by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in Shashi Kiran [Shashi Kiran v. Union of India, WP (C) No. 5759 of 2010 sub nom Kanta Batra v. Union of India, 2014 SCC OnLine Del 2797] batch of cases but affirming the view in other two batches.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mr. Subhash Chandra vs Delhi Subordinate Services Selection ... on 9 July, 2009

43. The position of law is well settled that if there are two conflicting views of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the latest judgment is to be considered having the binding precedence, as has been held in Subhash Chandra v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board [(2009) 15 SCC 458]. For ready reference, the relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment is quoted:-
Central Information Commission Cites 1 - Cited by 136 - Full Document

Seema M R vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on 2 December, 2022

(v)the judgment dated 06.09.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of 2025.05.28 RAVI KANOJIA17:31:30+05'30' 25 Item No. 36 (Court No. II) OA No. 2108 of 2022 with 22 (Twenty-two) OAs India in SLP (C) No. 18727 of 2023 titled Union Territory of Ladakh& Ors. vs. Jammu & Kashmir National Conference & Anr. (vi) The judgment dated 31.10.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Review Petition (C) No. 1620 of 2023 in Civil Appeal No. 1661 of 2020 titled Sanjay Kumar Agarwal vs. State Tax Officer (1) & Anr. (vii) the judgment dated 10.08.2010 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) No. 14027 of 2009 titled Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Madhu Bhushan Anand; (viii) the judgment dated 20.09.2011 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in LPA No. 708 of 2002 titled R.D. Gupta & Ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.(ix) the judgment dated 12.03.2021 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No. 7712/2020 titled Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs. Manju Sehgal and W.P. (C) No.9851/2020 titled Kendriya Vidyalya Sangthan vs. Ramesh Chandra Agarwal; (x) the judgment dated 31.10.2023 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulum in OP (Central Administrative Tribunal) No. 124 of 2019 titled M.R. Indira vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1