Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.31 seconds)
Dinesh Kumar Shukla vs Central Provident Fund Commissioner on 23 July, 2025 cites

State Of Gujarat vs Umedbhai M. Patel on 27 February, 2001

23.​ From the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat Vs. UmedBhai M Patel (supra), which the respondents have themselves relied on in support of their argument, it can be drawn that the object of compulsory retirement is to weed out the dead wood in order to maintain efficiency and initiative in the Digitally Page 21 of 23 MADHU signed by KUMARI MADHU KUMARI O.A./377/2020 with O.A./280/2023 service and also to dispense with the services of those whose integrity is doubtful so as to preserve purity in the administration.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 276 - K G Balakrishnan - Full Document

Union Of India vs Col. J. N. Sinha And Anr on 12 August, 1970

In Union of India & Ors. vs. Dulal Dutt (1993) 2 SCC 179, this Court reiterated the view held right from the case of R.L. Butail vs. Union of India (1970) 2 SCC 876 and Union of India vs. J.N. Sinha (1970) 2 SCC 458 "that an order of a compulsory retirement is not an order of punishment. It is actually a prerogative of the Government but it should be based on material and has to be passed on the subjective satisfaction of the Government. Very often, on enquiry by the Court, the Government may disclose the material but it is very much different from the saying that the order should be a speaking order. No order of compulsory retirement is required to be a speaking order."
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 460 - K S Hegde - Full Document

J. D. Shrivastava vs State Of M.P. & Others on 24 January, 1984

In the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has referred to its decision in J.D. Srivastava vs. State of M.P. & Ors. (1984) 2 SCC 8 in which the observations made in paragraph 7 includes the following: "...(vi) The order of compulsory retirement shall not be passed as a shortcut to avoid departmental enquiry when such course is more desirable...(viii) Compulsory retirement shall not be imposed as a punitive measure."
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 37 - E S Venkataramiah - Full Document

Umesh Chandra Shukla Etc. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 August, 1985

pension, increment and leave. The applicant submitted an appeal against the aforesaid punishment order on 20.11.2019 . The respondents also issued transfer orders against the applicant on 25.11.2019 and 26.11.2019 transferring him to another zone without mentioning any protection of pay and seniority. The applicant filed O.A./231/2020 (Umesh Kumar Shukla and others vs. Union of India and others) against the transfer order as well as the relieving orders passed by the respondent. The applicant was then issued a show cause notice dated 21.07.2020 to explain as to why he should not be reverted as Sahyogi on the basis of the verification committee report. The applicant challenged the show cause notice dated 21.07.2020 through O.A./646/2020 which was dismissed as having become infructuous on the information from the respondents that the applicant has been compulsorily retired during the pendency of the said O.A. and in absence of any information from the applicant. Vide Impugned order dated 30.12.2020, the applicant has been compulsorily retired under Rule 56(J) of the Fundamental Rules/Rule 48 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and then the impugned corrigendum to the office order dated 30.12.2020 was issued on 12.01.2021. Being aggrieved, the applicant sent a detailed representation on 10.02.2021 before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I which issued the impugned order dated 29.07.2021 rejecting the claim of the applicant. The applicant moved an appeal/representation before respondent no.2 on Digitally Page 4 of 23 MADHU signed by KUMARI MADHU KUMARI O.A./377/2020 with O.A./280/2023 12.09.2021 and then again on 10.02.2022 and 13.04.2022 but no action was taken even after sending it again through proper channel on 20.09.2022.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 277 - E S Venkataramiah - Full Document
1   2 Next