Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.17 seconds)
Karamjit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 26 March, 2025 cites

Chamoli Dist.Coop.Bank Ltd.Tr.Sec.& ... vs Raghunath Singh Rana & Ors on 17 May, 2016

7. A bare perusal of the above stated settled principle of law in the issue makes it clear that the impugned orders of revising the pay of the petitioner(s) have been passed in violation of the settled principle of law in Chamoli District Co-operative Bank Ltd through its Secretary/Mahaprandhak and another vs. Raghunath Singh Rana and others, 2016(12) SCC 204, decided on 17.05.2016 and in Civil Appeal No. 9417 of 2019 titled as M/s Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and another vs. State of U.P. and another 2019 (12) JT 283, decided on 13.12.2019.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 87 - A Bhushan - Full Document

M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ... vs State Of ... on 24 April, 2017

7. A bare perusal of the above stated settled principle of law in the issue makes it clear that the impugned orders of revising the pay of the petitioner(s) have been passed in violation of the settled principle of law in Chamoli District Co-operative Bank Ltd through its Secretary/Mahaprandhak and another vs. Raghunath Singh Rana and others, 2016(12) SCC 204, decided on 17.05.2016 and in Civil Appeal No. 9417 of 2019 titled as M/s Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and another vs. State of U.P. and another 2019 (12) JT 283, decided on 13.12.2019.
Allahabad High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 64 - Full Document

Grosons Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. & Anr vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors on 5 September, 2001

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that in case, the benefit if any, was to be withdrawn, the said proposal should have been given to the employees concerned and it is only after seeking their response, the benefit granted should have been withdrawn by recording due reasons, which fact is missing in the present case and the withdrawal of benefit is contrary to the settled principle of law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 2265 of 2011 titled as Chamoli District Co- operative Bank Ltd through its Secretary/Mahaprandhak and another vs. Raghunath Singh Rana and others, 2016(12) SCC 204, decided on 17.05.2016 and in Civil Appeal No. 9417 of 2019 titled as M/s Daffodills 2 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 02-04-2025 21:20:56 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:041413 CWP-4561-2021(O&M) and other connected cases -3- Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and another vs. State of U.P. and another 2019 (12) JT 283, decided on 13.12.2019.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 75 - V N Khare - Full Document

Sur Enamel And Stampingworks (P) Ltd vs Their Workmen on 7 May, 1963

"19. The compliance of natural justice in domestic/disciplinary inquiry is necessary has long been established. This Court has held that even there are no specific statutory rule requiring observance of natural justice, the compliance of natural justice is necessary. Certain ingredients have been held to be constituting integral part of holding of an inquiry. The Apex Court in Sur Enamel and Stamping Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Their Workmen reported in (1964) 3 SCR 616 has laid down following:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 108 - K C Gupta - Full Document
1