Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.34 seconds)
T Sakthivel Murugan vs Posts on 27 January, 2025 cites

Minor Naveen Subramaniam M.A Thr. His ... vs Union Of India Ministry Of Health And ... on 23 September, 2016

27. The Learned counsel for the respondents brought out certain new facts in the written submissions which are not in the reply filed by them in the respective OAs and stated that these facts were not agitated or discussed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras while passing the order in W.P. No.13225/2010 in the case of M. Subramaniam Vs. UOI. However, it is for the learned counsel for the respondents to agitate the same before the Hon'ble High Court Madras and not before this Tribunal. In view of the rule of Judicial discipline, we are bound by the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras which has attained the finality.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 124 - Full Document

The Government Of Tamil Nadu & Anr vs S.Arumugham & Ors on 20 November, 1997

13. It is also submitted that the Government has the right to frame a policy and policy matters, as observed by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. S. Arumugham (1998) 2 SCC 1988, the Tribunal cannot substitute its own views for the views of the Government or direct new policy based on the views of Tribunal. The Assured Career Progression and Modified Assured Career Progression Schemes were introduced to address stagnation by granting financial upgradation to employees who have not received promotions. No employee is entitled to any further financial upgradation beyond what is provided under the MACP scheme.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 33 - S V Manohar - Full Document
1   2 Next