Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.26 seconds)Executive Engineer Panchayat(Maa & ... vs Samudabhai Jyotibhai Bhedi & 3 on 7 June, 2017
6 On both these counts, therefore, the petition is allowed. The
respondents are directed to extend the benefits of payment of
Leave Encashment of 300 days to the petitioner as the denial is
illegal. The same shall be paid to the petitioner considering the total
length of service of the petitioner in accordance with the decision
rendered in the case of Executive Engineer Panchayat (Maa
and M) Department vs. Samudabhai Jyotibhai Bhedi (supra).
State Of Gujarat vs Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas & Anr. Etc. on 14 May, 2015
10. Thus, we are of the opinion that the present case is
also squarely covered by the aforesaid two decisions
rendered by this Court. Learned Single Judge has,
therefore, not committed any error while placing
reliance upon the Division Bench decision rendered in
the case of Mahendrakumar Bhagvandas(supra). We are
also in agreement with the reasons recorded by learned
Single Judge."
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Surendranagar Dist.Panchayat & vs Umarkhan Alikhan Malek & 2 on 29 March, 2016
12. In case of Surendranagar Dist. Panchayat and Anr. v.
Umarkhan Alikhan Malek and ors., Division Bench of this
Court in its judgment dated 29.03.2016 rendered in
Letters Patent Appeal No.2047 of 2004, considered the
issue where the employee had sought pensionary
benefits having worked from the years 1978 to 1991.
The learned Single Judge applying the formula of section
25B of the Industrial Disputes Act held that the
employee had put in continuous service for more than
10 years as a daily wager. He was entitled to benefit of
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 including the
benefits of pension. The administration had merely
contended that the workman had not put in actual 10
years of service after regularization before he can seek
pensionary benefits."
Jorubhai Jijibhai Dabhi & 3 vs State Of Gujarat Thro.Secretary & 2 on 14 August, 2015
5.3 The Division Bench in the said Letters Patent Appeal
No.457 of 2016 also referred to another Division Bench
judgment dated 30th October, 2015 delivered in Letters
Patent Appeal No.1310 of 2015 and held to confirm the
Jorubhai Jijibhai Dabhi (supra) and finally stated as under.
Chimansingh Nathusingh Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 27 December, 2018
In Chimansingh Nathusingh Solanki (supra), the
following was observed which forms the reasoning of this
order,
"5.
1