Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.18 seconds)U.O.I And Anr vs Surender Singh Parmar on 20 January, 2015
12. Consequently, the cumulative effect of the authoritative
judicial pronouncement as carried in the above extracted paragraph,
made in Surender Singh Parmar's case (supra), thus completely
countervails both the supra arguments raised before this Court, by the
counsel for the petitioners, thus for denying to the respondent, the
benefit of the service pension for his serving in the DSC, merely on the
ground that he has not completed the qualifying period of service,
besides on the further flimsy ground, that only the competent authority
is authorized to condone the said shortfall.
Smt. Bhakri Devi vs Union Of India on 11 September, 2019
(iii) In reference to Point (d), it is held that the law being
fully settled, including by Constitutional Courts, there is no scope or
occasion to doubt the correctness of the earlier decision of this
Tribunal in Bhani Devi's case. It thus lays down the correct legal
proposition of law. (iv) Question No. (e) stands answered in Para 47
herein above.
Sham Kaur vs Union Of India And Ors on 28 October, 2014
11. Therefore, the judicial verdict (supra), does render negated
the supra argument raised by the counsel for the petitioners, that the
empowerment to condone the requisite shortfall, becomes solitarily
vested in the Competent Authority, especially when the hereinabove
underlined paragraphs, as occur in the verdict made in Surender Singh
Parmar's case, alluded to in the verdict made in Shama Kaur's case, do
invest jurisdiction in the Writ Court, to through judicial intervention,
thus make the espoused condonation.
1