Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.46 seconds)
A K Sharma vs M/O Railways on 23 May, 2019 cites

Narinder Mohan Arya vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd. & Ors on 5 April, 2006

ii) The applicant has also relied upon another judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Mohan Arya v. United Assurance, [2006 (3) SLJ SC 211]. In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the Appellate Authority has to pass a reasoned and speaking order on all paras which were part of the appeal. It is noted that in the instant case, the orders passed by the Appellate Authority 7 RA No.96/2019 In OA No.2806/2012 and by the Revising Authority in compliance to orders in OA No.1075/2010 adequately addressed the issues raised by the applicant. This judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court is of no help to the applicant.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 369 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Union Of India (Uoi) vs Jagdish Prasad on 2 December, 1981

i) In Union of India v. Jagdish Prasad, decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 22.04.2013 in W.P.(C) No.4847/2012, certain punishment was imposed by DCM which in turn was enhanced by Senior DCM as Appellate Authority, who had signed on behalf of DRM. The 5 RA No.96/2019 In OA No.2806/2012 petitioner therein was working as Goods Supervisor in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000. The fact of the case was that the petitioner was promoted as Goods Supervisor in this pay scale by the DRM and accordingly the Hon'ble High Court had taken that the Appointing Authority was DRM and the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, who is an authority subordinate to the DRM, was not competent to issue the punishment order of compulsory retirement and the same was quashed by Tribunal with liberty to Railway to start the punishment process from the stage it went wrong. This was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 6 - Full Document
1