Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.93 seconds)
V.Ramesh vs The General Manager on 20 July, 2011 cites

State Of U. P. & Ors vs Gobardhan Lal on 23 March, 2004

"8. A government servant has no vested right to remain posted at a place of his choice nor can he insist that he must be posted at one place or the other. He is liable to be transferred in the administrative exigencies from one place to the other. Transfer of an employee is not only an incident inherent in the terms of appointment but also implicit as an essential condition of service in the absence of any specific indication to the contrary. No Government can function if the government servant insists that once appointed or posted in a particular place or position, he should continue in such place or position as long as he desires (see State of U.P. v. Gobardhan Lal1, SCC p. 406, para 7).
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 1319 - D Raju - Full Document

Union Of India Etc. Etc vs K.V. Jankiraman Etc. Etc on 27 August, 1991

"21. The aforementioned Regulation, however, could be invoked only when the disciplinary proceedings had clearly been initiated prior to the respondent's ceasing to be in service. The terminologies used therein are of seminal importance. Only when a disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against an officer of the bank despite his attaining the age of superannuation, can the disciplinary proceeding be allowed on the basis of the legal fiction created thereunder i.e. continue as if he was in service. Thus, only when a valid departmental proceeding is initiated by reason of the legal fiction raised in terms of the said provision, the delinquent officer would be deemed to be in service although he has reached his age of superannuation. The departmental proceeding, it is trite law, is not initiated merely by issuance of a show-cause notice. It is initiated only when a charge-sheet is issued (see Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman11).
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1332 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Union Of India & Ors vs Sangram Keshari Nayak on 27 April, 2007

13[14]. The circular letters issued by the appellants put restrictions on a valuable right of an employee. They, therefore, are required to be construed strictly. So construed, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the conditions precedent contained therein must be satisfied before any action can be taken in that regard. It was furthermore observed that: (SCC p. 632, para 18) 18[20]. A departmental proceeding is ordinarily said to be initiated only when a charge-sheet is issued. (See also Union of India v. Sangram Keshari Nayak13.)
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 180 - S B Sinha - Full Document

S.Amarjit Singh Kalra (Dead) By L.Rs. & ... vs Pramod Gupta (Dead) By L.Rs. & Ors on 17 December, 2002

"10.In the matter of applicability of the procedural rigours the Constitution Bench of this Court in Sardar Amarjit Singh Kalra v. Pramod Gupta1 has observed that laws of procedure are meant to regulate effectively, assist and aid the object of substantial and real justice and not to foreclose even an adjudication on the merits of substantial rights of citizen under personal, property and other laws. With the march and progress of law, the new horizons explored and modalities discerned and the fact that the procedural laws must be liberally construed to really serve as handmaid, make it workable and advance the ends of justice, technical objections which tend to be stumbling blocks to defeat and deny substantial and effective justice should be strictly viewed for being discouraged, except where the mandate of law inevitably necessitates it. It follows from the decision by the Constitution Bench that the procedure would not be used to discourage the substantial and effective justice but would be so construed as to advance the cause of justice. The consolidated petition filed on 30-4-2003 by the petitioner would not be taken to be a new petition presented before the Central Registrar to declare it to be barred by limitation on the basis of its date of presentation; it shall have to be read in continuation of the earlier representations which were referred to the Central Registrar for adjudication under the orders of the Delhi High Court."
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 155 - D Raju - Full Document

National Hydroelectric Power ... vs 1.Shri Bhagwan on 11 September, 2001

"5. The High Court while exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India had gone into the question as to whether the transfer was in the interest of public service. That would essentially require factual adjudication and invariably depend upon peculiar facts and circumstances of the case concerned. No government servant or employee of a public undertaking has any legal right to be posted forever at any one particular place or place of his choice since transfer of a particular employee appointed to the class or category of transferable posts from one place to other is not only an incident, but a condition of service, necessary too in public interest and efficiency in the public administration. Unless an order of transfer is shown to be an outcome of mala fide exercise or stated to be in violation of statutory provisions prohibiting any such transfer, the courts or the tribunals normally cannot interfere with such orders as a matter of routine, as though they were appellate authorities substituting their own decision for that of the employer/management, as against such orders passed in the interest of administrative exigencies of the service concerned. This position was highlighted by this Court in National Hydroelectric Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Shri Bhagwan 1."
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 711 - Full Document
1   2 Next