Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 3171 (1.61 seconds)

Dr M M Raval vs Vice Chancellor & 4 on 31 March, 2016

decision   /   Government   Resolution   dated   26.4.2000 and Circular dated 25.5.2006, respective petitioners were   paid   the   "Advance   Increment"   and   therefore,   the   action   of   the   respondents ... clarified  by  the  Resolution   dated   21.8.2009.   Of­course,   by   Circular   dated   25.5.2006,   the   payment of "Advance  Increment" was objected and same came
Gujarat High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - J B Pardiwala - Full Document

Satish Manchanda And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 December, 2016

additional increments wrongly, due to misinterpretation of advance increment as additional increment; henceforth these increments shall be merged into the normal increments, but no recovery ... advance increment will be provided but advance increment never means additional increment. They are two different benefits. Therefore, only advance increment can be allowed
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 4 - R N Raina - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next