Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.25 seconds)
R. D. Gupta & Ors. vs D.T.C. & Anr. on 9 May, 2011 cites

Dtc Retired Employees' Association & ... vs Delhi Transport Corporation, Etc .. ... on 8 May, 2001

7. It is clear that there is a difference between the VRS 1993 and those introduced and implemented in 1994 and 1995. In the VRS floated in the year 1994 and 1995 it was expressly stipulated that the employees who opt for voluntary retirement would not be entitled to join the pension scheme. The Supreme Court in DTC Retired Employees' Assn. Vs. Delhi Transport Corpn., (2001) 6 SCC 61 in view of express stipulation in the VRS 1994 and 1995 has held that the employees opting for the voluntary retirement under the said scheme would not be entitled to benefit of pension scheme. The ratio of said LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 708/2002 Page 7 of 16 decision is based and edified on the specific stipulation in the two schemes.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 33 - K G Balakrishnan - Full Document

Dtc vs Suraj Bhan & Anr on 29 January, 2010

6. On going through the records we find that the facts of this case are identical with the case DTC LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 708/2002 Page 9 of 16 v. Vir Bhan decided by this Bench on 24th May, 2007. In the said clause also the employee had availed of the voluntary retirement scheme and was allowed to retire on 31st May, 2993. He had also taken the ........(sic). In the said case we have held that though the employee had no opted for the pension scheme within the prescribed period of thirty days, but Clause-9 of the office Order dated 27th November, 1992 was applicable to the employee and the subsequent option exercised by the employee for getting provident fund and gratuity instead of pension scheme should not have been accepted by the DTC. We upheld the order of the learned Single judge in that case holding that the employee was entitled to pension.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 19 - J R Midha - Full Document
1