A. P. SAHI, ANJANA MISHRA
Shamsher Bahadur Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary – Respondent
AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, J.
1. Heard Shri S.D. Sanjay, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Shri Rohitabh Das, Assistant Counsel to Additional Advocate General No. 10 for the State of Bihar.
2. The appeal which has given rise to this controversy has arisen out of the order passed by the Department of Labour, Government of Bihar dated 24th August, 2016, whereby the State Government has refused to accept the contention of the appellant for extending him the benefit of enhancement of the age of superannuation from 60 to 65 years on the ground that the appellant has already been absorbed in a different cadre of the Labour Department, whereas his initial Parent Department was of the Health Services and consequently no such benefit can be extended.
3. There is no dispute about the fact of the appellant having been initially appointed in the Health Services of the Government of Bihar and later on being transferred to the Labour Department where he occupied different posts and ultimately upon being appointed as the Inspector of Factories (Medical) he came to be absorbed against the said post. The impugned order further records that on account of his absorption, he looses his l
Dr. Sharfe Alam Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors
Lala Nand Kumar & Ors. Vs. The Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. & Ors.
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Dayanand Chakrawarty and others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.