Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.20 seconds)
National Highways Authority Of India vs Sanjeev Kumar Sharma & Ors. on 5 April, 2016 cites

K. Madhavan And Anr. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors. Etc on 9 October, 1987

16. In K. Madhavan and Another case (supra), the Supreme Court had examined the expression „on a regular basis‟ used the applicable rules. This expression, it was observed, had created some ambiguity in W.P.(C) Nos.9227/2014 & 4/2015 Page 16 of 20 the eligibility clause giving rise to the controversy. It was held that there could not be any doubt that when a person was appointed to a post against a permanent vacancy on probation, his appointment was on a regular basis, but when a person was appointed to a post on a purely temporary or ad hoc basis, the appointment was not on a regular basis. Referring to the expression „on a regular basis‟, the Supreme Court held that the said expression cannot be interpreted to mean, service rendered as on absorption in the CBI as SP. The general principle was that in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, the length of service from the date of appointment to a post should be taken into consideration for the purpose of seniority in that post or eligibility for the higher post. Paragraph 10 of the judgment in K. Madhavan (supra) reads:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 141 - M M Dutt - Full Document
1