Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.62 seconds)
Uday Kumar Neogi vs Department Of Defence Production on 2 July, 2024 cites

The Director (Admn. And Hr) Kptcl vs C.P. Mundinamani on 11 April, 2023

6.3. At this stage, it is required to be noted that there are divergent views of various High Courts on 4 O.A./350/871/2024 the issue involved. The Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the Himachal Pradesh High Court and the Kerala High Court have taken a contrary view and have taken the view canvassed on behalf of the appellants. On the other hand, the Madras High Court in the case of P. Ayyamporumal (supra); the Delhi high Court in the case of Gopal Singh Vs. Union of India and Ors. (Writ Petition (C) No. 10509/2019 decided on 23.01.2020); the Allahabad High Court in the case of Nand Vijay Singh and Ora.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 557 - M R Shah - Full Document

Yogendra Singh Bhadauria vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 September, 2020

Vs. Union of India and Ors. (Writ A No. 13299/2020 decided on 29.06.2021); the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Yogendra Singh Bhadmauria and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh; the Orissa High Court in the case of AFR Ann Kumar Biswal Vs. State of Odisha and Anr. (Writ Petition No. 17715/2020 decided on 30.07.2021); and the Gujarat High Court in the case of Stale of Gujarat Vs. Takhatsinh Udasinh Songars (Letters Patent Appeal No. 868/2021) have taken a divergent view than the view taken by the Fall Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and have taken the view that once an employee has earned the increment on completing one year service lie cannot be denied the benefit of such annual increment on his attaining the age of superannuation and/or the day of retirement on the very next day.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 44 - S Nagu - Full Document

Union Of India vs Tarsem Singh on 19 September, 2019

7. Thus, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the issue of delay and latches/limitation and continuous wrong as defined by the Apex Court in the aforementioned judgment passed in the case of Tarsem Singh (supra) is applicable to the instant original application and accordingly, arrear payment of only three years preceding to the date on which the instant original application was filed is liable to be granted in favour of the applicant.
Supreme Court of India Cites 80 - Cited by 3438 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1