Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.24 seconds)
Rohit Kumar Son Of Shri Sita Ram vs Mukhya Nagar Adhikari, Kanpur Nagar ... on 21 November, 2005
cites
State Of Uttar Pradesh And Anr vs Kaushal Kishore Shukla on 11 January, 1991
31. The question that needs to be considered is whether the order terminating the services of the petitioner was stigmatic in nature. The Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Kaushal Kishore Shukla (supra) held as follows:-
Commissioner, Food And Civil Supplies vs Prakash C. Saxena on 5 May, 1994
9. The petitioner was clearly a temporary employee and the terms and conditions contained in the appointment letter clearly provided that his services could be terminated at any time without notice. A temporary employee has no right to the post as has been held by the Supreme Court in the cases ofState of U.P. v. Kaushal Kishore Shukla ; Triveni Shankar Saxena v. State of U.P. and Ors. ; Commissioner of Food & Civil Supplies v. Prakash Chandra Saxena ; Ram Chandra Tripathi v. U.P. Public Services Tribunal and Ors. ; Madhya Pradesh Hast Shilpa Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Devendra Kumar Jain and Anr. .
Ram Chandra Tripathi vs U.P. Public Services Tribunal Iv And ... on 25 February, 1994
9. The petitioner was clearly a temporary employee and the terms and conditions contained in the appointment letter clearly provided that his services could be terminated at any time without notice. A temporary employee has no right to the post as has been held by the Supreme Court in the cases ofState of U.P. v. Kaushal Kishore Shukla ; Triveni Shankar Saxena v. State of U.P. and Ors. ; Commissioner of Food & Civil Supplies v. Prakash Chandra Saxena ; Ram Chandra Tripathi v. U.P. Public Services Tribunal and Ors. ; Madhya Pradesh Hast Shilpa Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Devendra Kumar Jain and Anr. .
Madhya Pradesh Hasta Shilpa Vikas Nigam ... vs Devendra Kumar Jain & Ors on 7 December, 1994
9. The petitioner was clearly a temporary employee and the terms and conditions contained in the appointment letter clearly provided that his services could be terminated at any time without notice. A temporary employee has no right to the post as has been held by the Supreme Court in the cases ofState of U.P. v. Kaushal Kishore Shukla ; Triveni Shankar Saxena v. State of U.P. and Ors. ; Commissioner of Food & Civil Supplies v. Prakash Chandra Saxena ; Ram Chandra Tripathi v. U.P. Public Services Tribunal and Ors. ; Madhya Pradesh Hast Shilpa Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Devendra Kumar Jain and Anr. .
K. L. Tripathi vs State Bank Of India And Others on 4 October, 1983
12. It cannot be doubted that the principles of natural justice cannot be put into a strait-jacket formula and that its application will depend upon the fact situation obtaining therein. It cannot be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. This is what has been held by the Supreme Court in K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India and Ors. ; N.K. Prasad v. Government of India and Ors. ; State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh ; Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa and in Vlveka Nand Sethi v. Chairman, J&K Bank Ltd. .
N.K. Prasada vs Government Of India And Ors on 12 April, 2004
12. It cannot be doubted that the principles of natural justice cannot be put into a strait-jacket formula and that its application will depend upon the fact situation obtaining therein. It cannot be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. This is what has been held by the Supreme Court in K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India and Ors. ; N.K. Prasad v. Government of India and Ors. ; State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh ; Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa and in Vlveka Nand Sethi v. Chairman, J&K Bank Ltd. .
State Of Punjab vs Jagir Singh And Ors on 6 August, 1973
12. It cannot be doubted that the principles of natural justice cannot be put into a strait-jacket formula and that its application will depend upon the fact situation obtaining therein. It cannot be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. This is what has been held by the Supreme Court in K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India and Ors. ; N.K. Prasad v. Government of India and Ors. ; State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh ; Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa and in Vlveka Nand Sethi v. Chairman, J&K Bank Ltd. .
Karnataka State Rd Trans. Corp.&Ano vs S.G.Kotturappa&Anr on 3 March, 2005
12. It cannot be doubted that the principles of natural justice cannot be put into a strait-jacket formula and that its application will depend upon the fact situation obtaining therein. It cannot be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. This is what has been held by the Supreme Court in K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India and Ors. ; N.K. Prasad v. Government of India and Ors. ; State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh ; Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa and in Vlveka Nand Sethi v. Chairman, J&K Bank Ltd. .
Viveka Nand Sethi vs Chairman, J & K Bank Ltd. & Ors on 3 May, 2005
12. It cannot be doubted that the principles of natural justice cannot be put into a strait-jacket formula and that its application will depend upon the fact situation obtaining therein. It cannot be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. This is what has been held by the Supreme Court in K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India and Ors. ; N.K. Prasad v. Government of India and Ors. ; State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh ; Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa and in Vlveka Nand Sethi v. Chairman, J&K Bank Ltd. .