Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.16 seconds)

Haryana State Minor Irrigation ... vs G. S. Uppal & Ors on 16 April, 2008

8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case reported in (2008) 7 SCC 375 (Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation vs. G.S.Uppal) to contend that the Government cannot put forth financial loss as a ground only with regard to a limited category of employees and that courts should interfere with the administrative decisions pertaining to pay fixation and pay parity when they find such a decision to be unreasonable, unjust and prejudicial to a section of employees. We perused the said judgment in the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant. In paragraph http://www.judis.nic.in 7 No.21 of the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 86 - L S Panta - Full Document

K. T. Veerappa & Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 12 April, 2006

“21.There is no dispute nor can there be any to the principle as settled in the above cited decisions of this Court that fixation of pay and determination of parity in duties is the function of the executive and the scope of judicial review of administrative decision in this regard is very limited. However, it is also equally well settled that the courts should interfere with the administrative decisions pertaining to pay fixation and pay parity when they find such a decision to be unreasonable, unjust and prejudicial to a section of employees and taken in ignorance of material and relevant factors. (See K.T.Veerappa vs. State of Karnataka).”
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 214 - L S Panta - Full Document
1