Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.30 seconds)
Smt Archana Suhas Ghantellu And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 30 April, 2019 cites

Deshmukh Dilipkumar Bhagwan And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through Chief ... on 30 August, 2018

14. After the said judgment in case of Homraj Hansaram Bhise (supra), large number of petitions came up for consideration before the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition 37 ::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/05/2019 17:16:44 ::: civil wp 8387-13 group.doc No. 8387 of 2013 (Deshmukh Dilipkumar Bhagwan & Ors Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors) and connected petitions filed by the teachers and non-teaching staff of private recognized schools. These employees were appointed in the respective schools prior to 1.11.2005 at the time when the schools were not receiving 100% grant-in-aid from the Government. The schools started receiving 100% grant-in- aid after 1.11.2005. In face of the Government stand that these teachers would be governed by DCP scheme, the petitioners approached the High Court.
Bombay High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 127 - A Oka - Full Document

Anuradha Jayant Gangakhedkar vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation & ... on 26 July, 2012

18. Heavy reliance was placed on a decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Anuradha Jaywant Gangakhedkar Vs. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors.2 in which in the context of eligibility of a retired teacher to claim pension, it was observed that test which must be applied is as to whether an employee was a full time confirmed and approved member of the teaching or 2 2012(5) Mh.L.J. 775 42 ::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/05/2019 17:16:44 ::: civil wp 8387-13 group.doc non-teaching staff of a private primary aided school on the date of her retirement. It was observed that there is no warrant in the Pension Scheme or the Pension Rules to exclude while computing qualifying service, the service which is rendered by an employee before a school came to be in receipt of grant-in-aid. So long as the school was in receipt of grant-in-aid on the date on which an employee retired from service upon attaining the age of superannuation, the application of the Pension Scheme would be attracted.
Bombay High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 149 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document

State Of Maharashtra vs Manubhai Pragaji Vashi & Ors on 16 August, 1995

19. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Manubhai Pragaji Vashi & Ors.3 in which it was held that not extending the grant-in-aid to non-Government law colleges and at the same time extending such benefit to non- Government colleges with faculties such as Arts, Science, Commerce, Engineering and Medicine (other professional non-Government colleges) is patently discriminatory.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 293 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document

State Of H.P & Ors vs Rajesh Chander Sood Etc Etc on 28 September, 2016

20. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the 3 AIR 1996 SC 1 43 ::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/05/2019 17:16:44 ::: civil wp 8387-13 group.doc Supreme Court in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Rajesh Chander Sood & Ors.4 in which facts were that, such of the employees who had exercised their option to be governed by "1999 Pension Scheme", claimed to be regulated by the said scheme immediately on their having submitted the option. In such background, it was held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 75 - Cited by 334 - J S Khehar - Full Document

Harbans Lal vs State Of Punjab on 23 January, 1996

21. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Division Bench of Panjab and Haryana High Court in case of Harbans Lal Vs. The State of Punjab & Ors.5 in which in case of daily wage employee who was later on regularized, it was held that entire daily wage service of the employee till the date of his regularization would be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 813 - S B Majmudar - Full Document

D.S. Nakara & Others vs Union Of India on 17 December, 1982

Inevitable reference was made to the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in case of D.S. Nakara & Ors. Vs. Union of India 6. As is well known, in the said case, the Supreme Court was considering the validity of the cut off date contained in liberalized Pension formula. The Union of India had liberalized the pension formula which contained a cut off date for its applicability only to those employees who retired on or after said date. In other words, the employees retiring prior to the said date would not be governed by this liberalized formula. The Supreme Court held that said cut off date was arbitrary and 5 2010 SCC Online P&H 8181 6 AIR 1983 SC 130 45 ::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/05/2019 17:16:44 ::: civil wp 8387-13 group.doc violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 2485 - D A Desai - Full Document

The Chandigarh Administration And ... vs Mrs. Rajni Vali And Others. on 12 January, 2000

26. Reliance was placed on the decision of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Chandigarh Administration Vs. Rajni Vali10 in which it was observed that imparting primary and secondary education is the bounden duty of the State administration. It is the constitutional mandate that the State shall ensure proper education to the students on whom the future of the society depends.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 222 - S R Babu - Full Document
1   2 Next