SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 120

KURIAN JOSEPH, A.M.KHANWILKAR
BUDH RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent


JUDGMENT

KURIAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. It is the undisputed case of the appellants that they are similarly situated as the appellants covered by the order of this Court dated 17.11.2016 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.11005-11042 of 2016 titled Piyara Singh and Another Etc., v. State of Haryana & Ors. Etc., wherein this Court has taken a view that the 12% increase is to be granted cumulatively from the year 2000 itself and that there should be no cut.

3. The same judgment will apply in the case of the appellants as well.

4. The appeals are allowed to the above extent and the directions granted in the order referred to above shall hold good for these appeals also.

5. However, it is made clear that the appellants shall not be entitled to any statutory benefits for the period covered by the delay.

6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

7. There shall be no orders as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top