Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.32 seconds)
Union Of India & Ors. vs Smt. Kamla Devi on 29 May, 2023 cites

Ram Kumar & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 December, 1987

18. A clarification was, however, subsequently made in Ram Kumar and Others Vs. Union of India and Others [1988 (1) SCC 306], stating;The only other question to be seen is with regard to entitlement to pension. It appears that the Board on the basis of the Fourth Pay Commission report has provided for pension at the time of superannuation even to those who are temporary employees. In paragraph 12 of our order on the basis of material then placed before us, we had taken the view that temporary employees were not entitled to pension on superannuation. We direct the Railway Board to consider the claim of temporary employees who are before us for pension at the time of superannuation or otherwise in view of the fact that the Board has taken its own decision differently. Obviously appropriate material had not been placed before this Court when the submission of Mr. Ramaswamy for Railway administration was accepted in the order. The decision is beneficial to the employees and we direct that the Boards decision may be implemented.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 12 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Prabhavati Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 16 November, 1995

7. The Tribunal had also relied upon the judgment in the case of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHARMENDER SINGH W.P.(C) 2320/2023 Page 3 of 17 Signing Date:29.05.2023 15:13:12 2023:DHC:3777-DB Prabhavati Devi (supra). The Tribunal has referred to a notification signed by Assistant Personnel Officer-IV, Delhi Division, New Delhi dated September 23, 1983, wherein it was notified that Narayan Dutt, Substitute S&T Khallasi working under Signal Inspector (West) Delhi had died on July 28, 1983 and any information with respect to any amounts due to the said employee, be sent to the Settlement Section of the Personnel Branch. It was thereafter recorded by the same Assistant Personnel Officer that Narayan Dutt was appointed Khallasi; scale of pay of ₹196-232 was granted to him w.e.f. April 1, 1974; Provident Fund (PF) was deducted from December 1980; he is an unscreened Khallasi; and he was not absorbed against a regular post.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 50 - M M Punchhi - Full Document

Smt. Vallam Badia vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 21 June, 2002

"2005 clearly lays down the entitlement and privileges admissible to casual labour who are treated to be temporary i.e. given temporary status in the following terms; 2005. Entitlements and Privileges admissible to Casual Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHARMENDER SINGH W.P.(C) 2320/2023 Page 8 of 17 Signing Date:29.05.2023 15:13:12 2023:DHC:3777-DB Labour who are treated as temporary (i.e. given temporary status) after the completion of 120 days or 360 days of continuous employment (as the case may be).--(a) Casual labour treated as temporary are entitled to the rights and benefits admissible to temporary railway servants as laid down in Chapter XXIII of this Manual. The rights and privileges admissible to such labour also include the benefit of D & A Rules. However, their service prior to absorption in temporary/permanent/regular cadre after the required selection/screening will not count for the purpose of seniority and the date of their regular appointment after screening/selection shall determine their seniority vis-„-vis other regular/temporary employees. This is, however, subject to the provision that if the seniority of certain individual employees has already been determined in any other manner, either in pursuance of judicial decisions or otherwise, the seniority so determined shall not be altered. Casual labour including Project casual labour shall be eligible to count only half the period of service rendered by them after attaining temporary status on completion of prescribed days of continuous employment and before regular absorption, as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits. This benefit will be admissible only after their absorption in regular employment. Such casual labour, who have attained temporary status, will also be entitled to carry forward the leave at their credit to new post on absorption in regular service. Daily rated casual labour will not be entitled to these benefits.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 10 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Union Of India vs Shri M.C. Ghosh 9 Mcrc/26/2019 Yogesh ... on 7 January, 2019

The question also was considered in a recent judgment of this Court in Union of India v. Sukanti [ SLP (C) No. 3341 of 1993 decided on 30-07-1996 (Appended below)] wherein relying on the ratio in Ram Kumar case [(1988) 1 SCC 306 : 1988 SCC (L&S) 329 : (1987) 5 ATC 404 : (1988) 2 SCR 138] this Court held that Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHARMENDER SINGH W.P.(C) 2320/2023 Page 16 of 17 Signing Date:29.05.2023 15:13:12 2023:DHC:3777-DB no retiral benefit was available to the widow of the casual labourer who had not been regularised till his death. Thus, we hold that the view taken by the Tribunal in granting the pensionary benefits to the respondents is clearly illegal."
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 67 - Full Document
1   2 Next