Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.23 seconds)
Rajendra Singh Kadyan (Lt. General) vs Union Of India & Ors. on 1 December, 1998 cites

Union Of India And Others vs S.L. Dutta And Others on 16 November, 1990

The Court in Union of India & Others Vs. S.L. Dutta and Another's case (supra) did not interfere with the change of policy as there was merely a chance, of promotion of Air Vice Marshal in the Navigation Stream, to be affected by the change of said policy. As far as post of Air Marshal opened to the Air Vice Marshal in the said Stream was concerned, their right or eligibility to be considered for promotion still remained and hence Court held that there was no change in their conditions of service. Another contention was raised by the respondent that if at all the petitioner has suffered then compensation would vindicate his stand and in this connection has cited Lt. Coal.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 92 - M H Kania - Full Document

Lt. Col. Prithi Pal Singh Bedi Etc vs Union Of India & Others on 25 August, 1982

38. From the aforesaid definitions, it can be seen that fitness does not amount comparison between two persons. Fit in all respects takes into consideration fitness vis-a-vis his personality, physical ability, mental agility and thoughtfulness. Can the respondent give another meaning to 'fit' so as to include comparative merit or seniority-cum-merit. Supreme Court had the occasion to deal with the expression 'Corps' in Rule 40 of the Army Rules. In Lt. Col. Prithi Pal Singh Bedi Vs. Union of India & Others, Court held:
Supreme Court of India Cites 50 - Cited by 199 - D A Desai - Full Document

State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968

40. The whole case revolves around as to whether in terms of criteria mentioned for promotion as Army Commander, the criteria is seniority-cum-fitness or merit-cum-seniority. Supreme Court in State of Mysore Vs. C. Syed Mahmood & Ors., , while interpreting Rule 4(3)(b) of the Mysore State Civil Services General Recruitments Rules, 1957, which required promotion to be made by selection on the basis of seniority-cum-merit observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 128 - R S Bachawat - Full Document
1   2 Next