Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.17 seconds)
Pardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 3 December, 2025 cites

Gen. Manager,Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan vs Laxmi Devi & Ors on 15 May, 2009

6. A Two Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan v. Laxmi Devi (2009) 11 SCC 453 held that, "Since rules relating to compassionate appointment permit a side- door entry, the same have to be given strict interpretation" , Further reliance may be placed on another Two Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SAIL v. Madhusudan Das (2008) 15 SCC 560 observed that, "Compassionate appointment is a concession and not a right and the criteria laid down in the Rules must be satisfied by all aspirants."
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 174 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan And Ors vs Shri Dharmendra Sharma on 14 September, 2007

It has been crystallised by the Hon'ble Apex Court that compassionate appointments must be made strictly in adherence to the policy, to the extent that in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Dharmendra Sharma (2007) 8 SCC 148 the Hon'ble Apex Court stated that the courts cannot compel the employer to make appointments on compassionate ground contrary to its policy.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 3 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Rajwati And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 14 February, 2011

4). In compliance thereof, on 12.03.2013, the Industries and Commerce Department, Government of Punjab, issued an order (Annexure P-5) regularizing the services of 56 work charge and 321 daily wage officials with immediate effect. However, the father of the petitioner who was working as a work charge Chowkidar and had expired merely one month earlier, was excluded. The mother of the petitioner, namely, Rajwati, submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds on 12.08.2013 as discernible from (Annexure P-6) and her application was rejected on 07.03.2014 (Annexure P-7) on the ground that since her late husband had expired prior to the regularization of his services, as such, in view of the instructions dated 21.11.2002, compassionate appointment cannot be provided to legal heirs of the work charge employees. Another representation was filed on 23.04.2019 (Annexure P-9) by the mother of the petitioner requesting respondent No.2 for her appointment on compassionate grounds and detailing her pecuniary condition & hardship being faced by her in raising the minor children which led to filing of writ petition by the mother of the petitioner bearing CWP No.19110 of 2019 titled as 'Rajwati Vs. State of Punjab and another' which was withdrawn on 14.12.2022 with liberty to file a fresh petition with better particulars. In the meantime, the petitioner attained majority and also acquired basic qualification, as such, he submitted his 2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 13-12-2025 19:41:17 ::: CWP-10698-2023 -3- representation on 26.02.2021 and 06.12.2021 (Annexure P-11). The claim of the petitioner was rejected vide impugned order dated 30.01.2023 (Annexure P-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - R Bahri - Full Document
1