Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 42 (0.32 seconds)Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
D.S. Nakara & Others vs Union Of India on 17 December, 1982
47. Learned State counsel has further argued that in the recent
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 7230 of
2012 titled as Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another Vs.
Himachal Road Transport Corporation Retired Employees Union, decided on
50 of 69
::: Downloaded on - 24-07-2024 17:33:31 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:090987-FB
CWP-17310-2015 (O&M) and other connected cases
51
22.02.2021, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in D.S.
Nakara (supra) has been interpreted to be mean that the pensioners and the
employees in service do not constitute a homogeneous class and the benefit can
be granted to the employees within service keeping in view the financial
capacity of the State and no grievance can be raised by the employees who have
already retired from service.
State Of Punjab & Ors vs Amar Nath Goyal & Ors on 11 August, 2005
64 of 69
::: Downloaded on - 24-07-2024 17:33:31 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:090987-FB
CWP-17310-2015 (O&M) and other connected cases
65
this Court in State of Punjab & Ors. v. Amar Nath Goyal & Ors.
(supra).
Indian Ex-Services League And Ors. Etc vs Union Of India And Ors. Etc on 29 January, 1991
In this connection, the ratios in Krishena Kumar v.
Union of India, 1990(4) SCC 207; Indian Ex-Services League v.
Union of India, 1991(1) S.C.T. 468 : 1991(2) SCC 104; State
Government Pensioners' Association v. State of A.P., 1986(3) SCC
501 and All India Reserve Bank Retired Officers' Association v.
Union of India, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 664 are apt. In all these cases,
the prescription of a cut-off date for implementation of such
benefits was held not to be arbitrary, irrational or violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution.
S.A.Khan & Anr. vs Union Of India & Ors. on 7 May, 2015
Further, the reliance is also
being placed upon the judgment of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court in
S.A. Khan and another(supra), to contend that all the retirees are entitled for
the benefit of the amendment dated 25.08.2014 irrespective of their date of
retirement so as to re-fix their pension in terms of the amended Rule 8(1-A) of
Part-II Rules, 2009.
R.K. Aggarwal And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 21 December, 2012
33 of 69
::: Downloaded on - 24-07-2024 17:33:31 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:090987-FB
CWP-17310-2015 (O&M) and other connected cases
34
"23. After considering the arguments of learned counsels for
all the parties, we are of the opinion that it is not even
necessary to go into the various nuances and nitty grittys,
which are insisted by learned counsels for the petitioners
based on D.S. Nakara line of cases and N. Subbarayudu and
others and S.R. Dhingra and others (supra), wherein ratio of
D.S. Nakara is explained. We proceed on the basis that
fixation of cut off date by the government was in order and to
this extent we agree with the reasoning given by the Tribunal
where similar arguments, as advanced by the petitioners
before us, were rejected."
Union Of India vs P.N.Menon on 17 March, 1994
In State of Rajasthan v. Amrit Lal Gandhi,
(1997) 1 SC 421 : 1997(1) SCT 699 (SC) the ruling in P.N. Menon
case (supra) was followed and it was reiterated that in matters of
revising the pensionary benefits and even in respect of revision of
scales of pay, a cut-off date on some rational or reasonable basis
has to be fixed for extending the benefits.
All India Reserve Bank Retired Officers ... vs Union Of India And Others on 10 December, 1991
In All India Reserve Bank Retired Officers'
Association v. Union of India, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 664 : (1992) 19
ATC 856 a Bench of this Court distinguished the judgment in
Nakara, (1983) 1 SCC 305 and pointed out that it is for the
Government to fix a cut-off date in the case of introducing a new
pension scheme. The Court negatived the claim of the persons who
had retired prior to the cut-off date and had collected their retiral
benefits from the employer.
Gurtek Singh And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 11 January, 2012
(6) We are therefore of the view that the decision taken by the
Coordinate Bench in Gurtek Singh & Anr. case (supra) requires
reconsideration by a larger Bench.