Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)
K vs State on 28 December, 2011 cites

Punjab State Electricity Board & Ors vs Jagjiwan Ram And Ors on 12 February, 2009

In support of his arguments, learned advocate Mr. Mehta has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board and others versus Jagjiwan Ram and others, reported in (2009) 3 SCC 661 and laid emphasis on para 10 of the said judgment. Relying on the said judgment, learned Advocate Mr. Mehta argued that once an employee is regularized under any statute or scheme framed by the employer, then, he becomes a member of the regular establishment from the date of regularization. Learned Advocate Mr. Mehta thus urged to allow the petition.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 133 - G S Singhvi - Full Document

State Of Haryana vs Haryana Veterinary & A.H.T.S. ... on 19 September, 2000

In support of his arguments, learned AGP Mr. Dave has relied upon the decision in the case of State of Haryana versus Haryana Veternary & AHTS Association and another, reported in (2000) 8 SCC page 4. From this judgment, he pointed out that there is difference between regular service and continuous service and an employee who is in ad-hoc services is not entitled to the benefit of selection grade till such employee is regularly selected and become an employee on the regularly establishment. He further pointed out that in the case before the Hon'ble Apex Court also, the appointment of the respondent employee was considered as fresh appointment from the date of his selection as regular employee by the Public Service Commission and his past services on ad-hoc basis was held not to be counted for the Selection Grade Benefit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 221 - Full Document

State Of Punjab And Ors. vs Ishar Singh And Ors. on 20 February, 2001

Learned AGP Mr. Dave has also relied on the decision in the case of State of Punjab and others versus Ishar Singh and others, reported in (2002) 10SCC page 674. There also, the Hon'ble Apex COurt has laid down that the services rendered by an employee as an ad-hoc employee cannot be considered in reckoning the period of of service required for the purpose of fixation of pay in the revised scale.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 57 - Full Document

State Of Punjab & Anr vs Ashwani Kumar & Ors on 29 September, 2008

Learned AGP Mr. Dave has also relied on the decision in the case of State of Punjab and another versus Ashwani Kumar and others, reported in (2008) 12 SCC page 572 to point out that there also, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the services rendered by an employee as an ad-hoc employee cannot be included for calculating seniority. Summarizing his arguments, learned AGP Mr. Dave ultimately submitted that it is well settled position of law that the services rendered by an employee on ad-hoc basis cannot be considered for the purpose of giving benefit of Higher Grade Scale especially when the record clearly reveals that the appointment of the petitioner was not only purely ad-hoc but it was also stopgap arrangement till regularly selected candidate was made available through GPSC and especially when the services rendered by the petitioner as an ad-hoc employee was ordered to be continued with the regular services for the purpose of pension and leave. Learned AGP Mr. Dave would, thus, submit that in view of the principles of law in this regard settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief and therefore, this petition is required to be dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 27 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Surendra Nath Pandey & Ors vs U.P.Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors on 19 January, 2010

Thus, from the record available with the petition, it clearly appears that the appointment of the petitioner was purely ad-hoc appointment for the period between 16.2.1987 to 4.9.1997 and the services for the said period were ordered to be counted and joined with the regular services for the purpose of pension and leave and cannot be considered as regular services for the purpose of benefit of Higher Grade Scale. Judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court cited by learned Advocate Mr. Mehta would also be of no help to the case of the petitioner. In fact, in this judgment, it is nowhere laid down that an ad-hoc employee, on being regularized, his past services would be considered as regular service as if his appointment was, from the very beginning, a regular appointment. In fact, this judgment lays down that the work charge employee, on being regularized, his past services cannot be clubbed with the services in the regular establishment and the work charge employees cannot claim the benefit of past services for the purpose of fixation of seniority in the regular cadre, promotion to the higher post, fixation of pay in higher grade scale, grant of increments etc. The latest judgment by Hon'ble the Apex Court on the issue involved is in the case of Surendra Nath Pandey and another versus Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Bank Limited and another, reported in (2010) 12 SCC page 400. From the said judgment, para 9 is quoted as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 24 - Full Document
1