Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.23 seconds)
Deepak Goyal vs M/O Finance on 10 May, 2022 cites

Bhagwan Dass Pawaiya And Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 24 November, 1989

18. As OA No. 343/2018 has been dismissed, the OA No. 152/2019 also deserves to be dismissed in the light of the observations made herein-above as well as in view of the order passed in OA No. 207/2016 (Bhagwan Singh & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.), which has been upheld by Hon'ble High Court as well as by Hon'ble Supreme Court besides other judgments 27 OA No. 343/2018 with MA No. 31/2019, OA No. 152/2019, OA No. 126/2019 & OA No. 372/2017 with MA No. 70/2019 mentioned in the above paras. Accordingly, OA No. 152/2019 is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 16 - D P Wadhwa - Full Document

Vishvendra Kumar And Ors vs Union Of India And Anr on 15 June, 2017

Alwar, there was no requirement of the outsourced manpower with the DDIT (Inv.), Alwar. Thus, in order to reduce the expenses incurred on outsource services as the applicant was the only outsourced worker at Alwar station of the Directorate, the contractor, M/s. Raj Manpower was intimated vide letter no. 690 dated 24.12.2018 by the respondents not to continue services of four persons including the applicant. Respondents further state that this Bench of the Tribunal in OA No. 206/2016 (Vishvendra Singh & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.) & OA No. 207/2016 (Bhagwan Singh & 17 OA No. 343/2018 with MA No. 31/2019, OA No. 152/2019, OA No. 126/2019 & OA No. 372/2017 with MA No. 70/2019 Ors. vs. UOI & ors.) vide its order dated 30.05.2017 has dismissed the OA' filed by disengaged casual workers and upheld the action of the Department in disengaging them on revaluation and reassessment of work. The order of this Tribunal was challenged by those disengaged workers by way of filing DBCWP No. 8820/2017 and others connected Writ Petitions before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench and Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 02.06.2017 dismissed the said WPs and upheld the action of the Department.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 1 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

S.R. Bommai And Others Etc. Etc. vs Union Of India And Others Etc. Etc. on 11 March, 1994

Alwar, there was no requirement of the outsourced manpower with the DDIT (Inv.), Alwar. Thus, in order to reduce the expenses incurred on outsource services as the applicant was the only outsourced worker at Alwar station of the Directorate, the contractor, M/s. Raj Manpower was intimated vide letter no. 690 dated 24.12.2018 by the respondents not to continue services of four persons including the applicant. Respondents further state that this Bench of the Tribunal in OA No. 206/2016 (Vishvendra Singh & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.) & OA No. 207/2016 (Bhagwan Singh & 17 OA No. 343/2018 with MA No. 31/2019, OA No. 152/2019, OA No. 126/2019 & OA No. 372/2017 with MA No. 70/2019 Ors. vs. UOI & ors.) vide its order dated 30.05.2017 has dismissed the OA' filed by disengaged casual workers and upheld the action of the Department in disengaging them on revaluation and reassessment of work. The order of this Tribunal was challenged by those disengaged workers by way of filing DBCWP No. 8820/2017 and others connected Writ Petitions before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench and Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 02.06.2017 dismissed the said WPs and upheld the action of the Department.
Supreme Court of India Cites 195 - Cited by 604 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Vijay Singh & 12 Others vs Union Of India & Others -Respondents In ... on 10 July, 2009

13. We are in agreement with the order dated 18.03.2020 passed by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dharam Singh vs. UOI & Anr. (OA No. 176/2019) & other connected OAs; as relied upon by the respondents,; more particularly in an identical case decided by this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 31.01.2022 in the case of Poonam Kashyap & 25 OA No. 343/2018 with MA No. 31/2019, OA No. 152/2019, OA No. 126/2019 & OA No. 372/2017 with MA No. 70/2019 Ors. vs. UOI & Ors. (OA No. 42/2019), besides several other judgments/orders.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 5 - Cited by 15 - Full Document

Abdul Kader & Ors vs Union Of India on 20 December, 2010

OA No. 343/2018 with MA No. 31/2019, OA No. 152/2019, OA No. 126/2019 & OA No. 372/2017 with MA No. 70/2019 Thus, the applicants state that as they do the same work as regular employees, they are entitled to get the benefits of the said OM. Respondents issued an order dated 09.07.2007 fixing amount of Rs. 164/- per day for casual workers. The same came to be revised to Rs. 222 and thereafter to Rs. 292/- w.e.f 01.07.2008, but the same was given w.e.f. 01.10.2010. Similarly situated persons filed OA No. 531/2011 (Abdul Kadir & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.) before Jodhpur Bench of this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 14.08.2012 allowed the O.A. directing the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 292/- per day to casual workers w.e.f. 01.07.2008 with all consequential benefits and the said order of Tribunal was upheld by the Rajasthan High Court vide order dated 22.08.2013 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 49/2013 (UOI & Ors. vs. Abdul Kadir & Ors.) and the said issue is no more res integra.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 13 - M C Garg - Full Document

Union Of India & Ors vs Rajesh Rathod (Sunil) & Ors on 22 August, 2013

OA No. 343/2018 with MA No. 31/2019, OA No. 152/2019, OA No. 126/2019 & OA No. 372/2017 with MA No. 70/2019 Thus, the applicants state that as they do the same work as regular employees, they are entitled to get the benefits of the said OM. Respondents issued an order dated 09.07.2007 fixing amount of Rs. 164/- per day for casual workers. The same came to be revised to Rs. 222 and thereafter to Rs. 292/- w.e.f 01.07.2008, but the same was given w.e.f. 01.10.2010. Similarly situated persons filed OA No. 531/2011 (Abdul Kadir & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.) before Jodhpur Bench of this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 14.08.2012 allowed the O.A. directing the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 292/- per day to casual workers w.e.f. 01.07.2008 with all consequential benefits and the said order of Tribunal was upheld by the Rajasthan High Court vide order dated 22.08.2013 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 49/2013 (UOI & Ors. vs. Abdul Kadir & Ors.) and the said issue is no more res integra.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 6 - Cited by 49 - D Maheshwari - Full Document
1   2 Next