Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.26 seconds)
Ashwani Trikha vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghthan on 27 September, 2022 cites

Union Of India And Anr vs S.L. Verma And Ors on 28 November, 2006

"19. It is argued by the learned counsel for the University that once the learned Single Judge held that extension of the option was not authorized, there was no question of granting relief. Furthermore, in respect of those who had not opted for CPF, but whose contributions continued in the scheme, the court should not have granted relief, given the passage of time and the voluntary conduct of the teaching staff and officials. It was urged that the learned Single Judge erred in relying on Union of India v. S.L. Verma (2006) 12 SCC 53; in any case, the observations relied on were mere passing remarks, in the nature of obiter and clearly had no binding effect.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 58 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Union Of India & Anr vs Tarsem Singh on 13 August, 2008

26. Similar has been the position before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in the case of Gajendra Singh Rathore (supra) in which the Hon'ble High Court after considering the relevant facts and judgments in the case of M.S. Panwar (supra) and S.P. Tak vs. The Central Administrative & ors. in DBCWP No.10662/2016, which have attained finality upon dismissal of SLPs vide order dated 265.07.2019, allowed conversion of the petitioner from C.P.F to G.P.F. vide Order/Judgment dated 22.10.2021.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 2254 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Dr. R.N. Virmani & Ors. vs University Of Delhi And Anr. on 30 April, 2014

So far as judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Manju Sahgel (supra) is concerned, in the said case, though the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jaspal Kaur (supra) has been considered, however, neither the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.L. Verma (supra) has been considered nor the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Dr. R.N. Virmani (supra) has been considered.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 19 - R Shakdher - Full Document

Raj.Rajya Vidyut V Nigam Ltd vs Dwarka Prasad Koolwal & Ors on 7 August, 2014

In the said cases, though before the Hon'ble High Court judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jaspal Kaur (supra) was not brought to the notice, however, the identical facts were there and after considering the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs. Dwakar Prasad Koolwal and others, reported in AIR 2014 SC 365, and S.L. Verms (supra), the Hon'ble High Court allowed the prayer of the petitioners for conversion from CPF Scheme to GPF Scheme vide Order/Judgment dated 4.1.2018 and the said judgment has attained finality after dismissal of the SLP by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 26.7.2019.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 60 - M B Lokur - Full Document

S.P. Tak vs The Central Administrative & Ors on 4 January, 2018

13. After going through the said judgments/orders and after considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is seen that besides Jaspal Kaur's judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has also dealt with the said issue in S.L. Verma's case and has observed that the Petitioners deserve to be converted from CPF to GPF Scheme and after relying on the said matter as well as Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in SP Tak (supra), Hon'ble High Court has allowed the Appeal of the Petitioner, Shri Gajendra Singh Rathore (supra) vide its judgment dated 22.10.2021.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 2 - Cited by 7 - P Nandrajog - Full Document

Nirmala Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 40 Wps/432/2017 ... on 18 May, 2018

In spite of the said observations, we have still gone ahead in detail and also perused the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur in the case of Gajendra Singh Rathore vs. C.A.T. & Ors. (D.B.C.W.P. No. 14158/2019) decided on 22.10.2021, relied upon by Shri Amit Mathur, learned counsel for the applicant, wherein it was brought to our notice that the Hon'ble High Court though has not discussed Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in the case of Jaspal Kaur but in Gajendra Singh Rathore's case, the Hon'ble High Court has relied upon the judgments passed by the Court in DBCWP No. 5976/2017 in the case of M.S. Panwar vs. C.A.T. & Ors. and DBCWP No. 10662/2016 in the case of S.P. Tak vs. C.A.T. & Ors. wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held that the OM dated 01.09.1998 issued by KVS had a specific stipulation that those who desired to continue to 23 OA No. 611/2019, OA No. 402/2019 & OA No. 541/2019 be members of the CPF Scheme would have to exercise a positive option to remain as members of the CPF Scheme and that in absence of any option they would be deemed to be members of the Pension Scheme. In the said judgment, Hon'ble High Court has also relied upon the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in the case of SP Tak which has upheld the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court and dismissed the SLP filed by the Commissioner, KVS & Another [SLP (Civil) No. 21776/2019], on 26.07.2019.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 4774 - M M Shrivastava - Full Document

K.V.S. And Ors vs Jaspal Kaur And Ors on 6 June, 2007

From perusal of the above, it is clear that the third Member of this Tribunal was of the view that once issue has been considered and the same has been allowed by the Hon'ble High Courts after considering the various judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, including the case of Jaspal Kaur (supra) and objection of limitation and law thereon, the judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts would be binding and not the judgment(s) of the Single Bench and/or the Division Bench of this Tribunal on the same issue. Accordingly, third Member was of considered opinion that the applicants are entitled for conversion from 22 OA No. 611/2019, OA No. 402/2019 & OA No. 541/2019 C.P.F. to G.P.F. and the applicants' claim is not barred by limitation, delay and laches.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 16 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next