Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.22 seconds)
Jay Chand Parmanik vs M/O Railways on 4 May, 2023 cites

Bhura Subhas Bhai S/O Shri Bhura Ram ... vs The Union Of India Through The General ... on 30 August, 2013

(3) In OA No.48/2008, Vinod Kumar KannofeyaVs. Union of india and others (supra) decided by this Tribunal on 07.05.2009, in this case also the facts and circumstances are different from the present OA as firstly, the said Mr. Vinod was conferred with temporary status and order to the effect was issued and the case at hand, no such order conferring temporary status was issued to the applicant. Secondly, the applicant has not contended nor pleaded in the OA that he has been substituted by another substitute Bungalow Peon.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Raja Ram Joshi @ Rajendra Prasad Sharma @ ... vs Union Of India on 11 December, 2020

'p _ The appointment letter dt. 14.93.2005 clearly indicates that the service of the Applicant were purely temporary and fable to be jerminated at any time without assigning any reason, As the applicant has not completed tree years regular service, he was not entitled for regularization. Further, the plea taken by the Applicant regarding his oral termination has also been contradioted by the written order of termination of Applicant's service placed at Ex.6 & 6 respectively vide dated 03.08.2005 and 22.09.2008 The Applicant has alas not heen able io establish arbitrariness, malafide or Dias or infringement of any rules or terms and conditions under which & Paiced fenbeg et ME WyGS SOOOUTRG, 24 GA No.31/2014 (3) In the case of Rajkumar Sharma Vs. Union of lndia &Anr. in OA No.176/2001 decided by this Tribunal on 02.05.2001 (Annexure A-XI} by dismissing the OA with the observation that "/f is very clear therefore that a minimum of 3 years confinuous service is required for being screened for reguiarization, As the applicant does not fulfil this condition, he cannot be considered for regularization." The said order has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.3699/2002vide judgment dated 16.07.2002 (Exhibit R-X1D.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 10 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Smt Shaira Chavade, vs The Divisional Personnel Officer, on 18 June, 2012

Fresh Face Substitute Bungalow Peon is temporary and he can be removed at any time, 6.3. We have gone through the judgments cited by the counsel for the applicant in his support. We find that none of the cases are applicable to the facts of the present case as the applicant was not granted a temporary status and no stigma has been attached in his retrenchment order ta his future employment prospectus. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in WP No.14539/2001 in the case of Smt. Shaira Chavade Vs. Divisional Personal!
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1