Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.75 seconds)
Senior Superintendet Of Post Office, ... vs Nand Kishore And Anr on 23 January, 2019 cites

Union Of India And Ors vs Shakeel Ahmad Burney on 5 August, 2014

The Karnataka High Court in the case of Shri Basanna Nayak (supra) relied on the decisions of the Rajasthan High Court in Har Govind 18 of 20 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2019 14:45:21 ::: CWP-4829-2015 and connected matters [19] Sharma (supra) and the Delhi High Court in Shakeel Ahmed Burney (supra) in holding that the appointment of the applicants-Postmen on the post of Postal Assistants through a limited departmental competitive test was a case of direct recruitment and not of promotion.
Delhi High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 131 - S R Bhat - Full Document

The Union Of India And Ors vs Shri Basanna Nayak S/O Manappa on 20 September, 2016

The Karnataka High Court in the case of Shri Basanna Nayak (supra) relied on the decisions of the Rajasthan High Court in Har Govind 18 of 20 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2019 14:45:21 ::: CWP-4829-2015 and connected matters [19] Sharma (supra) and the Delhi High Court in Shakeel Ahmed Burney (supra) in holding that the appointment of the applicants-Postmen on the post of Postal Assistants through a limited departmental competitive test was a case of direct recruitment and not of promotion.
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 48 - Full Document

Ramkaran Kumhar vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 May, 2016

It was also noted that the judgment in Har Govind Sharma's case had been diluted by the subsequent decision of the Division Bench in Ramkaran Kumhar's case. Accordingly it was held that in view of the Rules the selection and appointment to the post of Postman of an employee holding a Group D post in the Postal Department was a promotion. The petitions were allowed and the orders of the Tribunals set aside.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 0 - Cited by 10 - S R Lodha - Full Document

Man Singh And Ors. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 7 December, 1992

In Man Singh's case (supra) the question was whether the appointment to the rank of Assistant Commandant in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) by Limited Departmental Competitive Examination tantamounts to appointment by promotion or is a direct recruitment appointment. The appointments to different posts in the CISF are effected either by direct recruitment or by promotion from the feeder posts in the CISF. Considering the increasing need for direct Assistant Commandants, 17% posts from the promotion quota of Feeder Cadre were diverted to cater for the vacancies to be filled up by conducting Assistant Commandant/ Limited Departmental Competitive Examination which was open to departmental candidates only. The Limited Departmental Competitive Examination comprised of a written examination, a physical efficiency test, an interview and a medical examination. The Court held that appointment through the LDCE is a mode of promotion. Reliance was also placed on clarification issued by the Department of Personnel & Training Estt. that the LDCE is a mode of promotion.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 6 - Full Document
1