Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.78 seconds)Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Council Of Scientific And Industrial ... vs K.G.S. Bhatt And Anr. on 29 August, 1989
[12] In Hukam Chand Gupta vs. Director General,
I.C.A.R. & Ors., reported in (2012) 12 SCC 666, the apex court
has held that the provisions contained in ACPs/MACPs are in
consonance with the observations made by it, in the case of Indian
Council of Agriculture (supra).
Dr. Ms. O.Z. Hussain vs Union Of India And Ors on 15 November, 1989
[11] Further, reliance has been made on Dr. Ms. O.Z.
Hussain vs. Union Of India And Ors., reported in (1990) Supp.
SCC 688, where the apex court has observed that:
Hukam Chand Gupta vs Director General, I.C.A.R. & Ors on 25 September, 2012
[12] In Hukam Chand Gupta vs. Director General,
I.C.A.R. & Ors., reported in (2012) 12 SCC 666, the apex court
has held that the provisions contained in ACPs/MACPs are in
consonance with the observations made by it, in the case of Indian
Council of Agriculture (supra).
Union Of India & Ors vs Dineshan K.K on 4 January, 2008
It
has been further observed in Dineshan K.K. (supra) that equation
of posts and equation of pay structure being complex matters are
generally left to the Executive and expert bodies like the Pay
Commission etc. It has been emphasized that a carefully evolved
pay structure ought not to be ordinarily disturbed by the Court as it
W.P.(C) No.592 of 2017 Page 16 of 19
[17]
may upset the balance and cause avoidable ripples in other cadres
as well.
Secretary, Finance Department And Ors vs West Bengal Registration Service ... on 20 February, 1992
In this regard, the reference has been made to the apex
court's decision in Secretary, Finance Department & Ors. vs.
West Bengal Registration Service Association & Ors. : (1993)
Supp.
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 39 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
State Of Tripura & Ors vs K.K. Roy on 12 December, 2003
While holding so, the apex court
also referred to its earlier decision in State of Tripura vs. K.K.
Roy, reported in (2004) 9 SCC 65, wherein non-application of
ACPs by the State Government was not appreciated, because the
post was left stagnated with any avenue of promotion. In that case,
the apex court had even directed the State Government to grant the
incumbent one higher scale of pay on completion of 12 years and
another upon completion of 24 years. Those decisions as referred by
W.P.(C) No.592 of 2017 Page 15 of 19
[16]
the respondents virtually do not have any relevance in the
perspective fact of the controversy, as raised in the writ petition.
[13] Having scrutinized the records so produced by the
respective parties and appreciated the submission made by the
learned counsel, the following questions have emerged for decision: