Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)
Unknown vs Union Of India Through The Secretary on 10 February, 2016 cites

Union Of India & Anr vs National Federation Of The Blind & Ors on 8 October, 2013

In the backdrop of sequence of facts and legal position discussed above, we are in agreement with the submission raised at the hands of the respondents that it is within the domain of the Government of India, to consider and decide the reservation in promotion in group A & B to reiterate, what the Lordships have held in case of National Federation of Blind (supra) is only computing 3% reservation in total number of vacancies in a cadre strength. We may also find merit in the contention raised at the hands of the respondents that there is no challenge to the OMs issued to the above effect not providing any reservation in promotion. No other point argued. Therefore, the OA is dismissed being devoid of merits. No order as to cost.
Supreme Court of India Cites 25 - Cited by 287 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Viklang Sang, Haryana vs State Of Haryana And Others. on 18 March, 2010

20. Even the judgment in the case of Viklang Sang, Haryana vs. State of Haryana ;Civil Writ Petition No. 12741 of 2009 decided on March 18, 2010, which itself is based upon judgment in case of Union of India v. Jagmohan Singh will render no assistance to the applicant because in that case despite the OM dated 20.11.1989 and corrigendum dated 4.7.1997 the UOI did not provided reservation in promotion to group C & D , therefore while dismissing writ petition at the hands of UOI the court directed them to provide reservation in promotion as per OMs issued by them. The court while recording its finding in para 30 held that there is no justification from deviating from the Governments policy contained in aforesaid OMs.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 14 - M Mudgal - Full Document

National Federation Of Blind vs Union Of India on 17 July, 2014

One judgment of the Honble Supreme Court passed in case of Union of India & Anr. Vs. National Federation of the Blind & Ors. (supra) and another judgment passed by the Delhi High Court passed in W.P (C) No. 15828/2006 titled National Federation of Blind Vs. U.O.I & Ors. decided on 17.07.2014 wherein similar arguments were raised and DB did find any merit in the contention raised at the hands of the applicant therein to hold that in case of National Federation of Blind (Supra) of the Honble Supreme Court, there is no intention by their Lordships to provide reservation even in Group A and B posts and the intention was only for computation for the purpose of reservation on total number of vacancies in the cadre strength. Then he referred to an order passed in WP(C) 15828/2006 by the Honble Delhi High Court decided on 12.09.2014 in review application of earlier order wherein also similar contention was rejected.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 9 - R S Endlaw - Full Document

P.U. Joshi & Ors., Union Of India & Ors vs The Accountant General, Ahmedabad, & ... on 19 December, 2002

This is so held in case of p .U. Joshi & others vs. Accountant General, Ahmadabad & others 2003(2) SCC 632 and in Mallikarjuna Rao & others State of Andhra Pradesh & others 1990 (2) SCC 707, wherein it has been held that courts or tribunals cannot direct the Government to frame statutory rules under Article 309 in a specific manner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 558 - D Raju - Full Document
1   2 Next