Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.30 seconds)

State Of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq Masih (White Washer) on 18 December, 2014

In view of the observations made in Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others (supra) that a few exceptions of extreme hardships could be excluded from the recovery proceedings and the subsequent decision in White Waher's case reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334, wherein the said situations were narrowed down and postulated, this Court is of the view that the instances mentioned therein could be adopted as a guideline. If so, the recovery made from the petitioner, who had reached his age of superannuation, cannot be sustained in view of Clause 18(ii) which states that recovery from the retired employees or the employees, who are due to retire within a period of one year, is impermissible in law.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 7379 - J S Khehar - Full Document

Chandi Prasad Uniyal And Ors vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors on 17 August, 2012

The learned counsel would rely on the decision in Chandi Prasad Uniyal and Others (supra) and submit that since the Hon'ble Supreme Court was of the view that the decision was under Article 136 of the Constitution, it would tantamount to laying down the correct proposition and therefore, since Chandi Prasad Uniyal and Others (supra) had held that excess payment made by the mistake was subject to recovery, there is no infirmity in the order. The relevant portion of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others' case (supra) reads as hereunder:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1165 - K Radhakrishnan - Full Document

Mariappan vs The District Collector And District ... on 18 August, 2014

6.Before adverting to the submissions made by the respective counsel, it would be appropriate to refer a recent decision of this Court in the case of Mariappan Vs. The Deputy Collector in W.P.(MD)No. 17348 of 2018, dated 18.12.2019, wherein a law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of White Washer's case (supra) was considered in detail and held as follows:-
Madras High Court Cites 86 - Cited by 6 - S Manikumar - Full Document
1