Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.36 seconds)
Sh. R.S. Meena vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation And ... on 15 October, 2024 cites

Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi vs S.C.Gupta on 22 April, 2013

This Court has considered the submissions as well as the material on record and previous rulings of the Supreme Court in Selvaraj v. Lt. Governor, Port Blair and Ors.; Judhistir Mohanty v State of Orissa and Ors. as well as the decision of the Division Bench of this court in Govt. Of NCT of Delhi and Ors. V. Shri S.C. Gupta and Ors. W.P. (C) 724/2010, decided on 06.09.2010 which mandates that in addition to ordinary pay, if a public servant is asked to discharge duties and functions attached to a higher post, he would be entitled to the pay and emoluments prescribed for such latter post. The Division Bench of this Court also notices Fundamental Rule 49 which regulates the pay of an individual asked to officiate, on a temporary basis, on independent basis or of higher responsibility. It mandates that in addition to the ordinary pay, the employee shall be allowed the pay admissible to him if he is appointed to officiate in the higher post.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 4 - P Nandrajog - Full Document

Judhistir Mohanty vs State Of Orissa & Ors on 13 September, 1996

In Judhistir Mohanty's case, the facts are that the appellant was working as Superintendent of Jail, in leave reserve, in the head office of IG (Prisons), and on a representation made by him to the Chief Minister expressing his difficulties, he was transferred and posted as Superintendent of Jail at Circle Jail at Behrampur, in the pay scale of Rs.850-1450. After retirement, the appellant claimed that the post against which he was working at Behrampur carried a higher scale of pay, but he was not extended the benefit thereof. The plea of the Government was that the appellant was holding a Class II post, and since that was not available at Behrampur, he was permitted to work in the post of Superintendent of Jail, which is a Class I post, and in that view of the matter, he is not entitled to Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 5756/2019 Page 26 of 29 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:30.10.2024 21:20 the higher scale of pay. The writ petition was dismissed, and in appeal, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 15 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Selvaraj vs Lt. Governor Of Island, Port Blair And ... on 16 March, 1998

This Court has considered the submissions as well as the material on record and previous rulings of the Supreme Court in Selvaraj v. Lt. Governor, Port Blair and Ors.; Judhistir Mohanty v State of Orissa and Ors. as well as the decision of the Division Bench of this court in Govt. Of NCT of Delhi and Ors. V. Shri S.C. Gupta and Ors. W.P. (C) 724/2010, decided on 06.09.2010 which mandates that in addition to ordinary pay, if a public servant is asked to discharge duties and functions attached to a higher post, he would be entitled to the pay and emoluments prescribed for such latter post. The Division Bench of this Court also notices Fundamental Rule 49 which regulates the pay of an individual asked to officiate, on a temporary basis, on independent basis or of higher responsibility. It mandates that in addition to the ordinary pay, the employee shall be allowed the pay admissible to him if he is appointed to officiate in the higher post.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 133 - Full Document

Col. (Retd.) B.J. Akkara vs The Govt. Of India & Ors on 10 October, 2006

12. Learned counsel for the respondents relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Col. B. J. Akkara v Government of India & others12 in support of their contention that the mere fact that an order or judgment of the High Court assumed finality on account of it not having been appealed in time, does not preclude the examination of the same at a later point of time.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 230 - Full Document
1   2 Next