Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.22 seconds)
Hari Das vs Director Of Fisheries And Anr. on 22 December, 2006 cites

Sant Ram Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan & Anr on 7 August, 1967

10. This Court is of the opinion that those procedural safeguards are meant for the protection of the employee against any arbitrary exercise of power by the authority in compulsorily retiring an employee. These are administrative instructions to fill up the gap in the statutory Rule. The statutory Rule 71(a) of the Code does not specify any procedure as to how the power of compulsory retirement in public interest shall be exercised. It is well settled where rules are silent that gap can be filled up by administrative instructions which are not inconsistent with the rules. Please see Sant Ram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan . Here that gap has been filled up by the aforesaid notification issued by the Government itself for compliance by the Secretaries of the Department of the Government. Therefore, the safeguards indicated in those notification must be followed when compulsory retirement of an employee in public interest has to be ordered.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 592 - V Ramaswami - Full Document

Amarjit Singh Ahluwalia vs The State Of Punjab & Ors on 20 December, 1974

The Apex Court has accepted the said formulation of Justice Frankfurter as valid and applicable in the case of Dr. Amariit Singh Ahluwalia v. The State of Punjab and Ors. and in another subsequent decision in the case of Sukhdev Singh and Ors. v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi and Anr. . The Apex Court further held that the said principle is virtually emanating from Article 14. The Apex Court also held that the said Rule has an independent existence apart from Article 14 and is a Rule of administrative law which has been judicially evolved as a check against exercise of arbitrary power by the executive authority.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 149 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Sukhdev Singh & Ors vs Bagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi And ... on 21 February, 1975

The Apex Court has accepted the said formulation of Justice Frankfurter as valid and applicable in the case of Dr. Amariit Singh Ahluwalia v. The State of Punjab and Ors. and in another subsequent decision in the case of Sukhdev Singh and Ors. v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi and Anr. . The Apex Court further held that the said principle is virtually emanating from Article 14. The Apex Court also held that the said Rule has an independent existence apart from Article 14 and is a Rule of administrative law which has been judicially evolved as a check against exercise of arbitrary power by the executive authority.
Supreme Court of India Cites 119 - Cited by 781 - A N Ray - Full Document
1