Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.19 seconds)
M.R. Subhadra vs Financial Adviser And Chief Controller ... on 4 July, 2000 cites

Direct Recruit Class Ii Engineering ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 2 May, 1990

In view of the Supreme Court decision in Direct Recruit's case (supra), I do not feel persuaded by the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel. Therefore, i( should be declared that the respondents are deemed to have relaxed the necessary qualifications as per the entry in Annexure-I read with the Regulation 6(a) of A.P. State Electricity Board Service Regulations-Part III. Accordingly the service of the petitioner from 1973 till 19-1-1984 shall have to be treated as regular service and the respondents have to take necessary steps for issuing necessary proceedings in the light of this order.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 915 - L M Sharma - Full Document

U.P. State Cement Corporation Ltd. vs Industrial Tribunal I And Anr. on 12 January, 1996

12. The learned Counsel for the respondents, however, relied on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of UPS Cement Corporation Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal, 1996 (II) LLJ 137 and submits that when a person is temporarily promoted without requisite and necessary qualifications, such a person cannot claim any right by virture of such continuance and that service shall have to be treated as temporary service.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - D K Seth - Full Document
1