Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.31 seconds)Dharam Singh And Others vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 9 March, 1962
In Dharam Singh v. State of U.P., this
Court strongly deprecated the culture of “ad-
Vinod Kumar Sangal vs Union Of India And Ors on 25 April, 1995
13.7 In Shripal v. Nagar Nigam, and Vinod
Kumar v. Union of India, this Court cautioned
against a mechanical and blind reliance on
Umadevi (supra) to deny regularization to
temporary employees in the absence of statutory
rules.
Shripal vs Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad on 12 September, 2023
13.7 In Shripal v. Nagar Nigam, and Vinod
Kumar v. Union of India, this Court cautioned
against a mechanical and blind reliance on
Umadevi (supra) to deny regularization to
temporary employees in the absence of statutory
rules.
The Fiscal Responsibility And Budget Management Act, 2003
Jitendra Kalita vs State Of Assam And Ors. on 17 May, 2006
71. Even otherwise, as correctly observed by the
learned Single Judge, there was no requirement for
the State to seek permission of the Court to
implement its own policy decision. The Full Bench in
Jitendra Kalita (supra) had itself observed that any
solution to the issue of regularization must be
undertaken by the State as a policy measure.
Regularization, where permissible in law, is an
executive function. It falls within the domain of policy
and administration. Courts do not grant prior
approval to executive decisions. The role of the Court
is confined to judicial review, that is, to examine
whether a policy or action is constitutionally valid,
fair and reasonable. It is not for the Court to
authorise the executive to exercise powers which
already vest in it.
Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006
ii. The Constitution Bench judgment in
Umadevi (supra) bars Courts, post 10th
April, 2006 (date of judgment in Umadevi),
from issuing directions for regularization of
temporary, ad-hoc, daily-wage or casual
workers, save and except the limited
exception carved out in paragraph 53.
State Of Karnataka & Ors vs M.L. Kesari & Ors on 3 August, 2010
ii. Exception under paragraph 53 of Umadevi
(supra), as explained in M.L. Kesari (supra)
applies only to irregular and not illegal
appointments of duly qualified persons
working against sanctioned posts for more
than ten years without any Court’s
protection. Since the writ petitioners were
never appointed against sanctioned posts,
they did not satisfy the threshold condition
for invoking the one-time regularization
exception.
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Modified Voluntary Retirement Scheme ... vs National Textile Corporation Limited on 26 October, 2021
11 Azam Jahi Mill Workers Association v. National Textile Corporation Ltd.,
(2022) 17 SCC 797.