Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.94 seconds)Management Of S.D. Model Senior ... vs District Judge -Cum- Service Tribunal & ... on 27 November, 2013
"1. Without going into the merits of the claim seeking pay
benefits under the 6th Pay Commission or the character of the
respondent school this case would have to be remitted to the
Educational Tribunal exercising territorial jurisdiction over
the dispute. The designated authority in Haryana to hear cases
of all disputes between the management and staff is the
District Judge of the respective district/Sessions Divisions.
There is ample judicial authority that disputes have to be sent
to the Tribunal for determination which include the Division
Bench judgment of this Court in Management of S.D. Model
Senior Secondary School and another v. District Judge-cum-
Service Tribunal and another, 2014 (1) S.C.T 652, the
Division Bench in LPA No.1172 of 2013 in case titled
Governing Body/Managing Committee and another v. Punjab
School Education Board and others, decided on July 08, 2013
and a number of Single Benches in CWP No.12904 of 2013,
Sandeep Pilania v. Arya Pritinidhi Shabha, Dayanand Math,
Rohtak and others, decided on September 01, 2017; CWP
No.11506 of 2013, anchan Sharma v. State of Haryana and
others, decided on September 20, 2017; CWP No.58 of 2014,
Sumit Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others,
decided on November 04, 2016 and lastly CWP No.4177 of
2015, Dr. Mukul Gupta v. Industrial Finance Corporation of
India Limited and others, decided on May 29, 2015 which
order and judgment is specific regarding financial benefits in
terms of recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission.
Governing Body/ Managing Committee And ... vs Punjab School Education Board And ... on 8 July, 2013
"1. Without going into the merits of the claim seeking pay
benefits under the 6th Pay Commission or the character of the
respondent school this case would have to be remitted to the
Educational Tribunal exercising territorial jurisdiction over
the dispute. The designated authority in Haryana to hear cases
of all disputes between the management and staff is the
District Judge of the respective district/Sessions Divisions.
There is ample judicial authority that disputes have to be sent
to the Tribunal for determination which include the Division
Bench judgment of this Court in Management of S.D. Model
Senior Secondary School and another v. District Judge-cum-
Service Tribunal and another, 2014 (1) S.C.T 652, the
Division Bench in LPA No.1172 of 2013 in case titled
Governing Body/Managing Committee and another v. Punjab
School Education Board and others, decided on July 08, 2013
and a number of Single Benches in CWP No.12904 of 2013,
Sandeep Pilania v. Arya Pritinidhi Shabha, Dayanand Math,
Rohtak and others, decided on September 01, 2017; CWP
No.11506 of 2013, anchan Sharma v. State of Haryana and
others, decided on September 20, 2017; CWP No.58 of 2014,
Sumit Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others,
decided on November 04, 2016 and lastly CWP No.4177 of
2015, Dr. Mukul Gupta v. Industrial Finance Corporation of
India Limited and others, decided on May 29, 2015 which
order and judgment is specific regarding financial benefits in
terms of recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission.
Suresh Sharma vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 11 April, 2019
This Court while deciding Suresh Sharma (supra) held as under:-
Dhananjay Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 2 May, 1995
"1. Without going into the merits of the claim seeking pay
benefits under the 6th Pay Commission or the character of the
respondent school this case would have to be remitted to the
Educational Tribunal exercising territorial jurisdiction over
the dispute. The designated authority in Haryana to hear cases
of all disputes between the management and staff is the
District Judge of the respective district/Sessions Divisions.
There is ample judicial authority that disputes have to be sent
to the Tribunal for determination which include the Division
Bench judgment of this Court in Management of S.D. Model
Senior Secondary School and another v. District Judge-cum-
Service Tribunal and another, 2014 (1) S.C.T 652, the
Division Bench in LPA No.1172 of 2013 in case titled
Governing Body/Managing Committee and another v. Punjab
School Education Board and others, decided on July 08, 2013
and a number of Single Benches in CWP No.12904 of 2013,
Sandeep Pilania v. Arya Pritinidhi Shabha, Dayanand Math,
Rohtak and others, decided on September 01, 2017; CWP
No.11506 of 2013, anchan Sharma v. State of Haryana and
others, decided on September 20, 2017; CWP No.58 of 2014,
Sumit Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others,
decided on November 04, 2016 and lastly CWP No.4177 of
2015, Dr. Mukul Gupta v. Industrial Finance Corporation of
India Limited and others, decided on May 29, 2015 which
order and judgment is specific regarding financial benefits in
terms of recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission.
Surinder Krishan Sharma vs State Of Punjab And Others on 9 May, 2019
The aforesaid order has already been upheld in LPA No.892 of 2019
titled as Surinder Krishan Sharma vs. State of Punjab and others on
09.05.2019.
Sandeep Pilania vs Arya Pritinidhi Shabha And Others on 1 September, 2017
"1. Without going into the merits of the claim seeking pay
benefits under the 6th Pay Commission or the character of the
respondent school this case would have to be remitted to the
Educational Tribunal exercising territorial jurisdiction over
the dispute. The designated authority in Haryana to hear cases
of all disputes between the management and staff is the
District Judge of the respective district/Sessions Divisions.
There is ample judicial authority that disputes have to be sent
to the Tribunal for determination which include the Division
Bench judgment of this Court in Management of S.D. Model
Senior Secondary School and another v. District Judge-cum-
Service Tribunal and another, 2014 (1) S.C.T 652, the
Division Bench in LPA No.1172 of 2013 in case titled
Governing Body/Managing Committee and another v. Punjab
School Education Board and others, decided on July 08, 2013
and a number of Single Benches in CWP No.12904 of 2013,
Sandeep Pilania v. Arya Pritinidhi Shabha, Dayanand Math,
Rohtak and others, decided on September 01, 2017; CWP
No.11506 of 2013, anchan Sharma v. State of Haryana and
others, decided on September 20, 2017; CWP No.58 of 2014,
Sumit Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others,
decided on November 04, 2016 and lastly CWP No.4177 of
2015, Dr. Mukul Gupta v. Industrial Finance Corporation of
India Limited and others, decided on May 29, 2015 which
order and judgment is specific regarding financial benefits in
terms of recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission.
1