Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.72 seconds)Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs State Of Haryana (Sawant, J.) on 4 May, 1994
In Umesh Kumar Nagpal v State of Haryana & Ors., (1994) 4
SCC 138, this Court has considered the nature of the right which a
dependant can claim while seeking employment on compassionate
ground. The Court observed as under: The whole object of granting
compassionate employment is, thus, to enable the family to tide
over the sudden crisis. The object is not to give a member of such
family a post much less a post for post held by the deceased.&. The
exception to the rule made in favour of the family of the deceased
employee is in consideration of the services rendered by him and the
legitimate expectations, and the change in the status and affairs of
the family engendered by the erstwhile employment which are
suddenly upturned.&. The only ground which can justify
compassionate employment is the penurious condition of the
deceaseds family. The consideration for such employment is not a
vested right. The object being to enable the family to get over the
financial crisis. (Emphasis added)
A. Umarani vs Registrar, Cooperative Societies And ... on 28 July, 2004
In A. Umarani v Registrar, Cooperative Societies & Ors., AIR
2004 SC 4504, while dealing with the issue, this Court held that
even the Supreme Court should not exercise the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 142 issuing a direction to give
compassionate appointment in contravention of the provisions of
the Scheme/Rules etc., as the provisions have to be complied with
mandatorily and any appointment given or ordered to be given in
violation of the scheme would be illegal.
Mosammat Bibi Sayeeda & Ors. Etc vs The State Of Bihar & Ors. Etc on 25 April, 1996
11. In Websters Comprehensive Dictionary (International Edition)
at page 1397, vested is defined as Law held by a tenure subject to
no contingency; complete; established by law as a permanent right;
vested interest. (Vide: Bibi Sayeeda v State of Bihar AIR 1996 SC
516; and J.S. Yadav v State of Uttar Pradesh (2011) 6 SCC 570)
Thus, vested right is a right independent of any contingency and it
cannot be taken away without consent of the person concerned.
Vested right can arise from contract, statute or by operation of law.
Unless an accrued or vested right has been derived by a party, the
policy decision/ scheme could be changed.
J.S.Yadav vs State Of U.P & Anr on 18 April, 2011
11. In Websters Comprehensive Dictionary (International Edition)
at page 1397, vested is defined as Law held by a tenure subject to
no contingency; complete; established by law as a permanent right;
vested interest. (Vide: Bibi Sayeeda v State of Bihar AIR 1996 SC
516; and J.S. Yadav v State of Uttar Pradesh (2011) 6 SCC 570)
Thus, vested right is a right independent of any contingency and it
cannot be taken away without consent of the person concerned.
Vested right can arise from contract, statute or by operation of law.
Unless an accrued or vested right has been derived by a party, the
policy decision/ scheme could be changed.
State Bank Of India & Anr vs Raj Kumar on 8 February, 2010
In State
Bank of India & Anr. (supra), this Court held that in such a
situation, the case under the new Scheme has to be considered.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Mgb Gramin Bank vs Chakrawarti Singh on 7 August, 2013
I may quote with profit a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
MGB Gramin Bank v. Chakrawarti Singh, AIR 2013 SC 3365. I may
quote paragraphs 5 to 13 of the decision as under :