K.RAMASWAMY, FAIZAN UDDIN, G.B.PATTANAIK
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Madhav S/o Gajanan Chaubal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. On the last occasion when the matter had come up after notice, since the respondents were not represented either in person or through counsel and when the counsel had pointed out the decision followed by the Tribunal, namely, Dr. Chakradhar Paswan vs. State of Bihar, (1988) 2 SCC 214, this Court had referred the matter to three-Judge Bench. Thus, the matter has come up to-day. Even now, none is appearing for the respondents; nor are they appearing in person. We have taken the assistance of Sri Goswami; learned senior counsel. We requested him to place on record the decision for or against him. He has fairly argued case.
4. The admitted facts are that in the National Savings Scheme Service, the Government had created various posts upto the post of Superintendent; there are number of posts but there is only one post of Secretary. This post is a feeder post for promotion as Regional Deputy Director in which category there are several posts. The Government applied the rule of reservation by rotation to the vacancies in the post of Secretary. 40 point roster is also being applied to these vacancies. In the post of Secretary, point No. 4 vac
R.K. Sabharwal and ors. vs. The State of Punjab and ors.
Arati Roy Choudhary vs. Union of India and ors.
Dr. Chakradhar Paswan vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Arati Roy Choudhary vs. Union of India and ors.
M. Venkateswarlu vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes vs. D. Sethu Madhva Rao
S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India
LIC of India vs. Consumer Education and Research Centre
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.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.