cites: 96955120

1 - 3 of 3 (0.36 seconds)

Ajay Kumar Jatav vs Border Security Force on 7 January, 2025 cites

State Of Punjab vs P.L. Singla on 31 July, 2008

8. The learned Single Judge, after considering the various judgments passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, i.e. State of Punjab v. Dr. P.L. 5/5 Singla, (2008) 8 SCC 469, State of UP and others v. Ashok Kumar Singh and another, (1996) 1 SCC 302 and the judgment passed by Madhya Pradesh High Court, in Dhruv Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others, decided on 06.07.2017, in WP No. 1169 of 2010 (S) came into conclusion that the action of the respondents are justified and there is no ground to interfere with the order of retirement of the petitioner.

Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 92 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

State Of U.P. & Others vs Ashok Kumar Singh & Anr on 10 November, 1995

8. The learned Single Judge, after considering the various judgments passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, i.e. State of Punjab v. Dr. P.L. 5/5 Singla, (2008) 8 SCC 469, State of UP and others v. Ashok Kumar Singh and another, (1996) 1 SCC 302 and the judgment passed by Madhya Pradesh High Court, in Dhruv Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others, decided on 06.07.2017, in WP No. 1169 of 2010 (S) came into conclusion that the action of the respondents are justified and there is no ground to interfere with the order of retirement of the petitioner.

Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 160 - K Venkataswami - Full Document

Ravi Kumar Dhruv And Anr vs State Of Chhattisgarh 58 Mac/731/2011 ... on 16 January, 2018

8. The learned Single Judge, after considering the various judgments passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, i.e. State of Punjab v. Dr. P.L. 5/5 Singla, (2008) 8 SCC 469, State of UP and others v. Ashok Kumar Singh and another, (1996) 1 SCC 302 and the judgment passed by Madhya Pradesh High Court, in Dhruv Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others, decided on 06.07.2017, in WP No. 1169 of 2010 (S) came into conclusion that the action of the respondents are justified and there is no ground to interfere with the order of retirement of the petitioner.

Chattisgarh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 10 - P Diwaker - Full Document

1