Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.16 seconds)
Smt. Bindu Pradeep Nair vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (Kvs) on 8 June, 2023 cites

Aruna Tiwari vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (Kvs) on 19 April, 2023

21. The matter is remitted back to the respondents with a direction to consider afresh the representation of the applicants by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with directives issued by the Hon'ble High Court of M.P. vide its order dated 03.03.2023 within a Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVASHISH MISHRA Signing time: 6/12/2023 5:32:47 PM 43 period of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order under intimation to the applicants. The interim relief granted during the pendency of these Original Applications is vacated in line with the observation made by the Hon'ble High Court of M.P. in some of the petitions of individual teachers that has also landed up before this Tribunal in the form of O.A. No.437/2023 (Aruna Tiwari v/s KVS)."
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 76 - S Nagu - Full Document

Smt. Lavanya Chandanalal vs Union Of India on 19 April, 2023

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners and submitted that on first occasion the Division Bench on 25.05.2023 refused to grant any interim protection and directed the respondent/authority to file an affidavit. He has submitted that declined to grant any interim protection by the Division Bench at the first instance would amount to refusal of interim protection to the petitioners. According to him, in pursuance to the affidavit/reply filed by the respondents, no case for grant of any interim relief is made out in favour of the petitioners. He has therefore submitted that the petitions are without any substance and deserve to be dismissed. However, he has also drawn attention of this Court towards the order passed by the Division Bench in M.P. No.1282/2023 (Smt. Lavanya Chandanlal Vs. Union of India and Others) decided vide order dated 19.04.2023 wherein the Division Bench has refused to grant any interim protection in favour of the petitioner therein and, therefore, according to him, in the present case also no case of any interim protection is made out in favour of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondents by filing an affidavit tried to justify the transfer of the petitioners saying that it is made in accordance with the provisions of the transfer guidelines. In the affidavit, it is stated by the respondents that the order passed by the Tribunal not granting any interim protection is perfect and the same does not call for any interference. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon several Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVASHISH MISHRA Signing time: 6/12/2023 5:32:47 PM 46 judgments of Supreme Court wherein it is observed that the transfer is an incidence of service and interference in the same exercising writ jurisdiction is improper.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 74 - S Nagu - Full Document
1