Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.39 seconds)
Pratap Narayan Vishwakarma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 July, 2015 cites

Union Of India & Ors vs Atul Shukla Etc on 24 September, 2014

There is no mention in the Scheme that the benefit of Second Time Scale Pay would not be made applicable to those employees who have been promoted on a 100% promotional post. The aforesaid provision has been introduced by way of clarification. In the aforesaid circular no reasons has been assigned for discrimination. It is contrary to the principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others vs. Atul Shukla and others quoted above that if two employees are part of the same cadre and rank, they cannot be treated differently for the purpose of pay and allowances. Article 14 of the Constitution of India forbids class legislation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 59 - T S Thakur - Full Document

The State Of West Bengal vs Anwar Ali Sarkar on 11 January, 1952

“16. A long line of decisions of this Court that have explained the meaning of equality guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and laid down tests for determining the constitutional validity of a classification in a given case immediately assume importance. These pronouncements have by now authoritatively settled that Article 14 prohibits class legislation and not reasonable classification. Decisions starting with State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali (AIR 1952 SC 75) down to the very recent pronouncement of this Court in Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Director, CBI and Anr. (AIR 2014 SC 2140) have extensively examined and elaborately explained that a classification passes the test of Article 14 only if (i) there is an intelligible differentia between those grouped together and others who are kept out of the group; and (ii) There exists a nexus between the differentia and the object of the legislation.”
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 600 - Full Document

Dr.Subramanian Swamy vs Director, Cbi & Anr on 6 May, 2014

“16. A long line of decisions of this Court that have explained the meaning of equality guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and laid down tests for determining the constitutional validity of a classification in a given case immediately assume importance. These pronouncements have by now authoritatively settled that Article 14 prohibits class legislation and not reasonable classification. Decisions starting with State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali (AIR 1952 SC 75) down to the very recent pronouncement of this Court in Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Director, CBI and Anr. (AIR 2014 SC 2140) have extensively examined and elaborately explained that a classification passes the test of Article 14 only if (i) there is an intelligible differentia between those grouped together and others who are kept out of the group; and (ii) There exists a nexus between the differentia and the object of the legislation.”
Supreme Court of India Cites 126 - Cited by 216 - R M Lodha - Full Document
1