Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.30 seconds)The States Reorganisation Act, 1956
Section 45 in The State Of Himachal Pradesh Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
Section 84 in The Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 [Entire Act]
C. P. Damodaran Nayar And P. S. Menon vs State Of Kerala And Others on 20 December, 1973
"Under Section 117 of the Act (States
Reorganization Act 1956) the Central Government may at
any time before or after the appointed day give such
directions to any State Government as may appear to it
to be necessary for the purpose of giving effect to the
foregoing provisions of this Part and the State
Government shall comply with such directions."
In accordance with the provisions of that Act, a
meeting of the Chief Secretaries of the various States that
were to be affected by the Reorganization' was held at the
invitation of the Central Government. In that meeting it was
agreed that in determining the relative seniority as between
two persons holding posts declared equivalent to each other
and drawn from different States, inter alia the length of
continuous service, whether temporary or permanent,
excluding periods in which an appointment is held in a
purely stop-gap or fortuitous arrangement, should be taken
into account. This Court held that the appellant in that
case should be given the benefit of his seniority reckoning
his continuous appointment and assigning the date 26.5.1951
and substituting the same in the final list for 6.10.1951,
and observed:
Roshan Lal Tandon vs Union Of India on 14 August, 1967
Mr. Tarkunde relied in this connection upon the
decision of this Court in Roshan Lal Tanldon v. Union of
India(1) and submitted that having come into the Central
Health Service on 1.11.1966 it is not open to Dr. S.P.
Kapoor who came into that service subsequent to the date on
which Dr. R.M. Bali joined that Service on the date of its
initial constitution to contend that his seniority must be
fixed
1069
with reference to the date of his appointment to the Punjab
Civil Medical Service Grade I. In that decision we find the
following passage at page 192:-
Section 117 in The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 82 in The Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 [Entire Act]
Mervyn Coutindo & Ors vs Collector Of Customs, Bombay & Ors on 14 February, 1966
In our opinion, the present case falls
within the principle of the recent decision of this
Court of Marvyn v. Collector [1966] 3 SCR 600."