Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.21 seconds)

Madras Bar Association vs Union Of India & Anr on 25 September, 2014

[2025:RJ-JP:6800] (9 of 10) [CW-2335/2025] 13.2 That registry working under the learned RAT shall make endeavors to list the fresh matters, within an upper limit of 3 working days from the date of registration/filing of the same. 13.3 That the State is directed to formulate an appropriate committee preferably consisting of Advocate General/Additional Advocate Generals', Principal Secretary (Law) to aid and advise Government to constitute/reform the Tribunal/working of the learned RAT in consonance with the ratio decendi of Madras Bar Association (supra). The said committee may be constituted in consonance with the provisions of Article 50 of the Constitution of India and allied provisions. It is recommended that the Chairman of the said committee be a retired High Court Justice/Principal District Judge with an experience of atleast five years, along with other requisite technical, administrative, judicial members and practicing advocates. The said committee shall give its recommendation qua the infrastructural needs, technical support and staff, vacancies and its repercussions, and shall formulate directives for smooth, speedy and efficacious disposal of the matters pending before the RAT. It is envisaged that the said committee be formulated expeditiously, and the recommendations made thenceforth be considered, pronto. 13.4 That the definition of 'government servant' and other definitions be also reviewed and appropriate course for amendment be taken. As a proposition the definition of 'government servant' has to include the employees from the State instrumentalities, for instance, Employees of Corporations, Universities, Public Sector Banks, Electricity Companies etc. (Downloaded on 20/02/2025 at 12:40:39 AM) [2025:RJ-JP:6800] (10 of 10) [CW-2335/2025]
Supreme Court of India Cites 355 - Cited by 330 - J S Khehar - Full Document

Pawan Kumar Meena S/O Ramchander Meena vs The State Of Rajasthan on 20 September, 2022

9. It is also analyzed while sitting with the present roster that the representation filed by the aggrieved employee qua the 'service matters' like promotion, seniority, transfer disciplinary proceedings, pensionary benefits, is not decided within the stipulated period or not considered at all. Therefore, this Court has passed a judgment titled Pawan Kumar Meena Vs. State of Raj. registered as SBCWP No. 1665/2024 for speedy and efficacious disposal of the representation(s) within 30 days, from the date of filing of the same. In consonant rhyme with the same the State through Chief Secretary has also passed instructions and directions.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - I Singh - Full Document
1