Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.21 seconds)
M K Sahoo vs Income Tax on 26 February, 2025 cites

Murli S. Deora vs Union Of India And Ors on 2 November, 2001

6. Since the Respondents/Ld. Counsel for the Respondents led emphasis on the maintainability of this OA, we would like to deal 11 O.A.No. 260/00058 of 2019 with the same at the first instance. We have examined the provision of the AT Act, 1985, the facts of the matter with reference to the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in the case of S.Bhaskar Dora (supra) so also of this Bench in OA No. 949/2013. We find that the question before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in the aforesaid case was as to whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction with regard to the disengagement of the petitioner, a casual Sweeper engaged on daily wage basis, and the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in the said case held that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to decide such matters. By following the said order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa, this Tribunal also dismissed OA No. 949/2013, whereas in the instant case, as to how far the respondents-department are justified in depleting/reducing the 1/30th pay scale, granted as per the DoP&T order, of the applicants, who are continuing on casual basis. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the orders relied on by the respondents have no application in so far as determination of the present grievance of the applicant.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 17 - Full Document

Surinder Singh And Anr. vs Engineer-In-Chief, C.P.W.D. And Ors. on 17 January, 1986

The Opposite Parties have been appointed on casual basis every now and then as Lighting Assistants since 1992/1993, performing duties that are integral to the functioning of Doordarshan. The Petitioners' claim, that the Opposite Parties are not entitled to regular pay because they are casual employees, is directly contradicted by the principles laid down in Jagjit Singh (supra). The consistent and prolonged engagement of the Opposite Parties in the same work as regular employees creates an equitable right to be compensated fairly.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 165 - O C Reddy - Full Document

Randhir Singh vs Union Of India & Ors on 22 February, 1982

For the benefit of those that do not seem to be aware of it, we may point out that the decision in Randhir Singh's case has been followed in any number of cases by this Court and has been affirmed by a Constitution Bench of this Court in D.S. Nakara v. Union of India . The Central Government, the State Governments likewise, all public sector undertakings are expected to function like model and enlightened employers and arguments such as those which were advanced before us that the principle of equal pay for equal work is an abstract doctrine which cannot be enforced in a court of taw should ill-come from the mouths of the State and State Undertakings.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 521 - O C Reddy - Full Document
1   2 Next