Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.30 seconds)
Augusta Kujur vs Education on 29 January, 2025 cites

A.N. Shashtri vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 11 December, 1987

In the meantime, one Shri Ram Prakash Tiwari and Mrs. T. Jayashree had challenged the Recruitment Rules published on 10.11.2004 and the Recruitment Notice dated 08.07.2005 before this Tribunal by filing O.A.No.112/AN/2005 and O.A.No.71/AN/2006 which were disposed of vide a common Order dated 24.05.2007 wherein judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of A.N. Shastri vs. State of Punjab, 1988 Supp SCC 127 was referred to and the respondents were directed to follow the same drill as followed in case of the applicant in the said case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 25 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Court In The Case Of Secretary, State Of ... vs . Uma on 9 April, 2015

In the said order, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi , 2006(4)SCC 1 was referred to and it was observed that irregular appointment cannot be regularized and a casual or part time employee has Digitally signed by SOMA BANDYOPADHYAY DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6794, OID.2.5.4.65= SOMA 133596418541584061RzFJVlZ8C5fhN1, Phone= 248a2038712d0767cdf2a9a674eb5cc32aa060bb09eb992ecb181b7a052a187d, PostalCode=700114, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= f048dc9a9c57abdc8eb507bb0fbc388d2dfdb37eb37045900c3c33b439ae01bc, CN= SOMA BANDYOPADHYAY BANDYOPADHYAY Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 1 - Cited by 2142 - Full Document

Harpratap Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 9 January, 2019

6. In view of the legal position stated above, no direction can be issued to the respondents to regularize the part time appointment of the applicant. However, since the applicant has been continuing for a long time and even after her failure in the last selection she has been allowed to continue, we dispose of this O.A. with a direction that the applicant be given a further chance in the next selection as and when it will be notified provided she is otherwise eligible as per the provisions of the recruitment rules and till such selection is made and a regular selected candidate is appointed, the applicant may not be disturbed. We are passing this order in view of the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hargurpratap Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2008(2)SCC (L&S)618 that one ad hoc appointee should not be displaced by another ad hoc appointee because such ad hoc appointee has gained experienced, which will be more beneficial and useful to the organization, rather than to appoint persons afresh on ad hoc basis. The O.A. is disposed of accordingly. No costs."
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 122 - Full Document

Union Of India vs Ilmo Devi . on 7 October, 2021

In view of the aforesaid discussions, it is clear that part time temporary employee has no legal right to be regularized in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court in ILMO DEVI supra. We find that the applicant is not entitled to get age relaxation as per the Circulars dated 06.06.2001 and 19.09.2011. As per the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in various judgments, one cannot challenge the selection process after taking part in the same. Since the applicant had appeared in the selection process, she has lost her right to challenge the same and claim appointment afterwards. Therefore, the claim of the applicant for appointment as Craft Instructor was rightly turned down by the respondents as per rules. No interference of the court is called for in this matter in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as mentioned supra.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 56 - M R Shah - Full Document

Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006

11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS Vs. ILMO DEVI & ANOTHER (Civil Appeal Nos.5689-5690 of 2021) referred to some of its earlier decisions in the case of State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3)[(2006)4 SCC 1], State of Maharashtra and Another Vs. S. Bhonde & Others, (2005) 6 SCC 751 and also some other relevant judgments on the same issue and observed as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 46 - Cited by 4959 - P K Balasubramanyan - Full Document

State Of Maharashtra And Anr vs R.S. Bhonde And Ors on 17 August, 2005

"8.7 Thus, as per the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions part-time employees are not entitled to seek regularization as they are not working against any sanctioned post and there cannot be any permanent continuance of part-time temporary employees as held. Part-time temporary employees in a Government run institution cannot claim parity in salary with regular employees of the Government on the equal pay for equal work."
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 32 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1