Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.32 seconds)
Smt. Asha Devi And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru' The Principal ... on 5 April, 2018 cites

Director Of Education (Secondary) & Anr vs Pushpendra Kumar & Others on 13 May, 1998

In Director of Education (Secondary) and Anr. v. Pushpendra Kumar and Ors. (1998 (5) SCC 192), it was observed that in matter of compassionate appointment there cannot be insistence for a particular post. Out of purely humanitarian consideration and having regard to the fact that unless some source of livelihood is provided the family would not be able to make both ends meet, provisions are made for giving appointment to one of the dependants of the deceased who may be eligible for appointment. Care has, however, to be taken that provision for ground of compassionate employment which is in the nature of an exception to the general provisions does not unduly interfere with the right of those other persons who are eligible for appointment to seek appointment against the post which would have been available, but for the provision enabling appointment being made on compassionate grounds of the dependant of the deceased-employee. As it is in the nature of exception to the general provisions it cannot substitute the provision to which it is an exception and thereby nullify the main provision by taking away completely the right conferred by the main provision."
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1064 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Smt. Phoolwati vs Union Of India & Ors. on 5 December, 1990

As it is in the nature of exception to the general provisions it cannot substitute the provision to which it is an exception and thereby nullify the main provision by taking away completely the right conferred by the main provision time consciousness or limit.The above view was reiterated in Phoolwati (Smt.) v. Union of India and Ors. (1991 Supp (2) SCC 689), and Union of India and Ors. v. Bhagwan Singh (1995 (6) SCC 476).
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 620 - Full Document

Smt. Sushma Gosain And Ors. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 25 August, 1989

In Smt. Sushma Gosain and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (1989 (4) SCC 468), it was observed that in all claims of appointment on compassionate grounds, there should not be any delay in appointment. The purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread-earner in the family. Such appointments should, therefore, be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 1022 - K J Shetty - Full Document

Shiv Kumar Dubey vs State Of U.P. And Others on 6 February, 2014

(emphasis supplied) In a most recent decision while dealing with issue of compassionate appointment in matters where the issue was that dependent was a minor and the question of relaxation in terms of time or age the full bench has formulated the principles as most guiding factors governing compassionate appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules vide para 29 and 30 of the judgment of the full bench in Shiv Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. 2014 (2) ADJ 312 (FB) that read as under:
Allahabad High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 88 - Full Document

Manoj Kumar Saxena vs District Magistrate And Ors. on 23 February, 2000

The petitioners have placed reliance Judgements of this Court on Manoj Kumar Saxena v. District Magistrate, Bareilly and Others, (2000)2 UPLBEC 1694 Chandra Deo Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and Others and Vivek yadav v. State of U.P. and Others, (2010) 4 UPLBEC, 2776 I find that even though sons had become major in the year 2001 and yet petitioners failed to approach this Court for long six years and this  writ petition has been filed in the year 2007 only. The object behind the compassionate appointment  is to mitigate the immediate hardship due to the sudden death of the bread-earner in the family. After lapse of 25 years when the family has already survived for so many years the very purpose has come to end.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 11 - B Din - Full Document

Shambhoo Lal Srivastava Son Of Sri ... vs District Judge And Ors. on 13 July, 2005

The petitioners have placed reliance Judgements of this Court on Manoj Kumar Saxena v. District Magistrate, Bareilly and Others, (2000)2 UPLBEC 1694 Chandra Deo Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and Others and Vivek yadav v. State of U.P. and Others, (2010) 4 UPLBEC, 2776 I find that even though sons had become major in the year 2001 and yet petitioners failed to approach this Court for long six years and this  writ petition has been filed in the year 2007 only. The object behind the compassionate appointment  is to mitigate the immediate hardship due to the sudden death of the bread-earner in the family. After lapse of 25 years when the family has already survived for so many years the very purpose has come to end.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 13 - S Ambwani - Full Document
1   2 Next