Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.52 seconds)
Rama Nand Vashista & Ors. vs The Union Of India & Ors. on 18 February, 2015 cites

D.S. Nakara & Others vs Union Of India on 17 December, 1982

9. Though at the hearing of the writ petitions learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents once again cited the decisions reported as 1997 (5) SLR 106 P.S.Ramamohana Rao Vs. A.P. Agricultural University & Anr. (2004) 6 SCC 685 State of Karnataka Vs. C.K.Pattamashetty & Anr., (2009) 13 SCC 635 State of M.P. Vs. Ramesh Chandra Bajpai, (1983) 1 SCC 305 D.S.Nakara & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors. and (2011) 5 SCC 305 State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Hirendra Pal Singh, to support their rival stands concerning whether librarians and DPEs were required to be treated as teachers and made a reference to the same letters, circulars and office orders and the statute of the university, we are not noting said contentions for the reasons as regards the petitioner they are a repeat of what was argued when W.P.(C) No.7130/2011 and W.P.(C) No.7939/2011 were decided by the Division Bench on May 18, 2011 and so is the case with the arguments of the respondents. As noted above by us, the contention of the petitioners was rejected by the Division Bench concerning their claim of the status of librarians and DPEs being that of teachers, and the stand taken by the respondents was accepted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 2485 - D A Desai - Full Document

State Of U.P. & Ors vs Hirendra Pal Singh Etc on 3 December, 2010

9. Though at the hearing of the writ petitions learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents once again cited the decisions reported as 1997 (5) SLR 106 P.S.Ramamohana Rao Vs. A.P. Agricultural University & Anr. (2004) 6 SCC 685 State of Karnataka Vs. C.K.Pattamashetty & Anr., (2009) 13 SCC 635 State of M.P. Vs. Ramesh Chandra Bajpai, (1983) 1 SCC 305 D.S.Nakara & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors. and (2011) 5 SCC 305 State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Hirendra Pal Singh, to support their rival stands concerning whether librarians and DPEs were required to be treated as teachers and made a reference to the same letters, circulars and office orders and the statute of the university, we are not noting said contentions for the reasons as regards the petitioner they are a repeat of what was argued when W.P.(C) No.7130/2011 and W.P.(C) No.7939/2011 were decided by the Division Bench on May 18, 2011 and so is the case with the arguments of the respondents. As noted above by us, the contention of the petitioners was rejected by the Division Bench concerning their claim of the status of librarians and DPEs being that of teachers, and the stand taken by the respondents was accepted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 178 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Krishan Gopal vs Union Of India And Ors. on 18 May, 2012

1. The above captioned writ petitions are the second innings played by the players; the first innings was played when W.P.(C) No.7130/2011 Krishan Gopal Vs. UOI & Ors. and W.P.(C) No.7939/2011 Damayanti V.Tambay Vs. UOI & Ors. were disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court on May 18, 2011, requiring the respondents to constitute a Committee and consider the matter afresh pertaining to the age of superannuation in the cadre of Librarians and the cadre of Physical Education in the universities and colleges to which grant was disbursed by the University Grants Commission, for the reason vide notification dated December 31, 2008, issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, the Government of India, apart from revising the pay scales of the teachers in Central Universities, enhanced the age of superannuation and restricted the said benefit to teachers who were engaged in classroom teaching. As per the Union of India, Central Universities and its constituent or affiliated colleges were finding it difficult to attract talent for classroom teaching and thus one incentive could be a longer tenure. The age of superannuation of teachers, staff in the librarian cadre and physical education cadre was 62 years. It was enhanced to 65 years for those teaching in the classrooms.
Delhi High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 14 - R S Endlaw - Full Document
1