RANJAN SHARMA
Swami Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of H. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 and respondent No.4.
2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition, is taken up for disposal at this stage, in view of the orders, intended to be passed herein.
3. The petitioner, being the widow has claimed for husband and then, the resultant family pension for herself, has filed the instant writ petition, for the following relief(s):-
4. Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has set up a case that the petitioner was initially engaged on daily wage basis in the year 1988 but based on continuous service from 1991 his services were brought on work charge establishment/regularization on completion of 10 years service and the petitioner retired from service at the age of 58 years on 30.06.2006, after rendering more than five years and five months of regular service.
In the above background, Mr. Ashwani Gupta, learned counse
Baldev vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others, CWP No. 2711 of 2017
Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P. and Ors. 1994 Supp2 SCC 316
Union of India versus Tarsem Singh
Shiv Dass versus Union of India and Others; (2007) 9 SCC 274
State of Madhya Pradesh and Others versus Yogendra Shrivastava (2010) 12 SCC 538
Asger Ibrahim Amin Versus Life Insurance Corporation of India (2016) 13 SCC 797
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.