Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.33 seconds)
The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs R.Haridoss on 30 November, 2018 cites

State Bank Of Patiala vs Pritam Singh Bedi & Ors on 7 July, 2014

9. Similar issue was considered by the Honourable Supreme Court in respect of an employee of the State Bank of Patiala with reference to Chapter IV Regulations 14 and 18 of the State Bank of Patiala (Employees) Pension http://www.judis.nic.in Regulations, 1995 in the decision reported in (2014) 3 LLN 17 (SC) (State Bank of Patiala Vs. Pritam Singh Bedi & Others), wherein the Supreme Court held that if there is a 17 regulation to count six months and more period as one completed year as pensionable service and the employee concerned having minimum pensionable service, he is entitled to get pension.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 50 - Full Document

State Of Tamil Nadu vs K.Thiruvanam Pillai on 20 October, 2014

7. Insofar as the Central Government employees are concerned, similar issue arose with respect to the calculation of 10 years of service under Rule 49 (3) of CCS Pension Rules, 1972 before a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.45465 of 2002, dated 4.10.2007. Even though a person was having a regular service of 9 years 3 months and 23 days, considering the E.D. Staff service of 29 years, this Court directed grant of pension treating that the person as completed 10 years of qualifying service. The said judgment was challenged before the Honourable Supreme Court in SLP.No.13829 of 2008, which was also dismissed on 17.10.2008 and the said judgment was implemented by order dated 9.10.2009.
Madras High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - N N Vasanthakumar - Full Document
1