Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.66 seconds)
Kameshwar Jha vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 19 April, 2000 cites

S.S. Rathore vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 September, 1989

12. It is settled law that an appeal is a continuation of the suit. The suit was filed, as said above, on 4.12.67, and, admittedly, the appellate order was communicated to the applicant on 5.12.64. The date of dismissal is 28.7.1960. If the starting point, in accordance with the aforesaid ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rathore's case is taken as 5.12.64, when the rejection order of appellate authority was communicated to the applicant, the Suit was filed within three years period of limitation on 4.12.67. It may be pointed out that the new Limitation Act came into force on 1.1.64, and the rejection order of the appellate authority was communicated to the applicant on 5.12.64. Therefore, the limitation period as provided under Article 58 of the new Limitation Act appears to be applicable which provides three years period of limitation from the date of cause of action.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 622 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Som Prakash Rekhi vs Union Of India & Anr on 13 November, 1980

23. Delhi Bench of the CAT in Om Prakash v. Union of India, (1992) 20 ATC 362=1995(1) SLJ 179 (Jodhpur) (CAT), held that normally the Government employee is reinstated with back wages, but no such direction can be given where employee is dead at the time of decision by the Tribunal. However, back wages from the date of invalid dismissal order to employee's date of superannuation was allowed. The period of invalid dismissal was directed to be taken as qualifying service for calculating pensionary benefits.
Supreme Court of India Cites 56 - Cited by 406 - V R Iyer - Full Document
1   2 Next