Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.25 seconds)Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 311 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 19 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 310 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
P. Savita S/O Shri P.L. Savita vs Union Of India, Ministry Of Defence ... on 1 May, 1985
• All Stenographers holding posts of Stenographer, GradeI, are
doing same work under the same employer and discharging
identical duties and performed same and/or similar functions and
Page 11 of 19
HC-NIC Page 11 of 19 Created On Sun Feb 21 02:34:30 IST 2016
C/SCA/12845/2014 ORDER
at all times all the Stenographers throughout were and/or are
drawing the same payscale. That being so, there is little or no
justification in putting 50% of them in a higher scale of pay and
50% others in a lower scale of pay. This grouping is without any
intelligible differentia but only on the ground of length of service.
Therefore, this type of grouping violates Article 14 of the
Constitution. (P. Savita & others Vs. Union of India, AIR 1985 SC
1124).
Article 312 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Parshotam Lal Dhingra vs Union Of India on 1 November, 1957
• It is also a settled position of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
that when a servant has right to a post or to a rank either under
the terms of the contract of employment express or implied or
under the rules governing the conditions of his service, the
termination of the service of such a servant or his reduction to a
lower post is by itself and prima facie a punishment, for it
operates as a forfeiture of his right to hold that post or that rank
and to get the emoluments and other benefits attached thereto.
[Purshotam Lal Dhingra Vs. Union of India, AIR 1958 SC 36(1)]
In the present case, the petitioner is appointed as Private
Secretary, GradeI (ClassII) on and from 22.03.1992 as per the
established procedure and Recruitment Rules existing at the
relevant time and has been thereafter further promoted to the post
of Principal Private Secretary, GradeI (ClassI). Therefore, as
such, petitioner has a right to the post of Private Secretary, Grade
I (ClassII) as well as to the post of Principal Private Secretary,
GradeI (ClassI) and therefore, reduction of the petitioner to a
lower post of Private Secretary, GradeII or to the post of Private
Secretary, GradeI (ClassII) (as the case may be) is by itself and
prima facie a punishment and that it operates as a forfeiture of his
right to hold that post or that rank and to get the emoluments and
other benefits attached thereto. The real hurt does not lie in the
consequences that follow. Protections of Article311 are not
Page 17 of 19
HC-NIC Page 17 of 19 Created On Sun Feb 21 02:34:30 IST 2016
C/SCA/12845/2014 ORDER
against harsh words but against hard blows. It is the effect of the
order alone that matters. Article 311 applies whenever any
substantial evil follows over and above a purely "contractual one".
It does not matter whether the civil consequences are one of the
"Penalties" prescribed by the rules or not. The real test is, do they
in face ensue as a consequence of the order made. Therefore also
the petitioner cannot be reduced in his rank.
P.V. Srinivasa Sastry And Others vs Comptroller And Auditor General And ... on 11 December, 1992
In the present case also, the petitioner never held the post of
Private Secretary or Stenographer, GradeII or was not member of
that cadre at any point of time and therefore, the petitioner
cannot be reverted to a lower cadre - Private Secretary, GradeII
to which he did not belong or to a lower rank which he did not
hold at any stage. (P.V. Srinivasa Sastry and others Vs.
Comptroller and Auditor General and others, AIR 1993 SC 1321
: (1993) 1 SCC 419.
1