Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.30 seconds)
Afr Patitapaban Dutta Dash And Others vs State Of Odisha & Others ..... Opp. ... on 9 September, 2021 cites

Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were engaged on monthly remuneration basis. They have already rendered more than 8 years of service under the opposite parties and therefore, seeks for regularization of services in view of the judgment passed by the Hon‟ble apex Court in Secretary State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi (3) and others (2006) 4 SCC 1 and in State of Karnataka & others Vrs. M.L. Kesari & others involving SLP(C) No.15774/2006.
Supreme Court of India Cites 46 - Cited by 4959 - P K Balasubramanyan - Full Document

Sheo Narain Nagar vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 13 November, 2017

16. It is further to be noted that similarly circumstanced employees in the employment of the State of Uttar Pradesh, who were appointed on daily wages/contractual basis had approached the Allahabad High Court praying for regularization of their services. The Single Judge had dismissed the Page 38 of 50 writ petitions which orders were affirmed by the Division Bench. The said employees therein had approached this Court by way of Civil Appeal No.18510 of 2017 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6183 of 2015) in the case of Sheo Narain Nagar cited supra. It will be relevant to refer to the following observations of this Court in the case of Sheo Narain Nagar (supra):
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 9 - Cited by 159 - Full Document

Nihal Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 7 August, 2013

"12. Applying the ratio of Umadevi (3) case [(2006) 4 SCC 1 : 2006 SCC (L&S) 753] , this Court in Nihal Singh v. State of Punjab [(2013) 14 SCC 65 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 85] directed the absorption of the Special Police Officers in the services of the State of Punjab holding as under: (Nihal Singh case [(2013) 14 SCC 65 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 85] , SCC pp. 79- 80, paras 35-36) "35. Therefore, it is clear that the existence of the need for creation of the posts is a relevant factor with reference to which the executive government is required to take rational decision based on relevant consideration. In our opinion, when the facts such as the ones obtaining in the instant case demonstrate that there is need for the creation of posts, the failure of the executive government to apply its mind and take a decision to create posts or stop extracting work from persons such as the appellants herein for decades together itself would be Page 35 of 50 arbitrary action (inaction) on the part of the State.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 491 - Full Document

Jatin Prasad Das vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opp. Parties on 2 September, 2021

Rajnish Kumar Mishra vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2019 (17) SCC 648; Jatin Kumar Das vs. State of Odisha and others (O.A. No. 2172 (C) of 2015 and batch, disposed of on 17.05.2017), which has been upheld by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 6661 of 2018, vide order dated 10.05.2018 and also by the apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 18642 of 2018, disposed of on 06.08.2018; Biswamitra Parida & another vs. State of Odisha and another (W.P.(C) No. 22112 of 2020 disposed of on 03.09.2020) which was confirmed in W.A. No. 822 of 2020 by the Division Bench of this Court on 10.02.2021 and also in Special Leave to Appeal No. 6851 of 2021 by the apex Court on 30.06.2021; and Rajendra Kumar Nayak vs. Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd. & Ors. 2017 (II) ILR -CUT-
Orissa High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - B R Sarangi - Full Document

Malathi Das(Retd)Now P.B.Mahish And ... vs Suresh & Ors on 7 March, 2014

"One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa (AIR 1967 SC 1071) (supra), R.N. Nanjundappa (AIR 1972 SC 1767) (supra), and B.N. Nagarajan (AIR 1979 SC 1676) (supra), and referred to in paragraph 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of courts or of tribunals.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 116 - R Gogoi - Full Document
1   2 3 Next