AI Overview

AI Overview...

  • Regulation 7.3 of Main Services Regulations, 1972 - This regulation is referenced in legal cases concerning reinstatement after conviction and the treatment of employees' service periods. Courts have relied on this regulation to determine whether a convicted employee can be reinstated and how their service benefits are to be calculated, considering previous rulings such as Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab Lachhman Dass Bansal VS Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - Punjab and Haryana.

  • Counting Military Service for Civil Service Benefits - Under Rule 4 of the Punjab Government, National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965, military service periods can be counted towards civil service increments, as exemplified in a case where a claimant sought such benefits from 1963 to 1966 Lakhinder Singh VS State Of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana.

  • Treatment of Extraordinary Leave and Pension - Rule 4.7 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules governs how extraordinary leave affects pension benefits. Courts have held that certain periods of extraordinary leave cannot be counted towards pension or increments, as clarified in a specific case where the court ruled the period from 1978 to 1981 did not qualify for pension benefits State Of Punjab and Others vs Baljit Kaur - Punjab and Haryana.

  • Sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of the Rules, 1990 - This sub-rule pertains to approval processes by the appointing authority for certain service-related decisions, emphasizing procedural compliance in service management Benedict Kharmalki VS State of Meghalaya - Gauhati.

  • Pay and Pension Rules & Seniority Rules - Rules such as Rule 2(3) of the Pay and Pension Rules, 1978, and Rule 32 of the Karnataka Civil Service (Seniority) Rules, 1957, establish guidelines for pay fixation, seniority, and service classification within civil services, including police and ministerial services S. Rangaswamy Naik and H. R. Bhagwandas  VS B. R. RavikanGowda - Karnataka.

  • Senior Service Disputes & Judicial Service Rules - Disputes regarding seniority and service conditions are governed by rules like the Punjab and Haryana Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963, with courts adjudicating based on these regulations to resolve service-related conflicts Nawab Singh VS State Of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana.

  • Voluntary Retirement & Service Rules - Under Punjab Civil Service Rules, specific provisions (e.g., Rule 2.2 and Rule 5.32B) regulate voluntary retirement, including conditions and eligibility, with courts examining these rules to determine rights and entitlements State Of Haryana VS S. K. Singhal - Supreme Court.

  • Resignation and Service Tenure - Rules such as Gujarat Panchayat Service Rules, 1996, and Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959, specify procedures and notice periods for resignation, affecting the effective date of resignation and tenure calculations District Panchayat, Kheda Through Chief Medical Officer VS Puhspaben Gordhandas Pandya - Gujarat.

  • Judicial Service Appointment Rules - Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008, outline the appointment process for judges, emphasizing selection procedures under Rules 6(7) and 8, and the importance of compliance with these rules for appointment validity Vithal Waman Shelke VS High Court of Bombay, through registrar General - Bombay.

  • Participation in Civil Service Recruitment - Under Rule 8 of Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch), employees of corporations adopting state service rules are generally not entitled to participate in the recruitment process for Punjab Civil Services, maintaining the distinction between different service entities KULJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS - Punjab and Haryana.


Analysis and Conclusion

The sources collectively highlight the importance of specific service rules, such as Regulation 7.3 of the Punjab Civil Service Regulations, for governing employment conditions, reinstatement, and benefit calculations. They emphasize procedural compliance, the treatment of various types of leave (extraordinary leave, military service), and the distinction between different service rules across states and services. Courts interpret these rules to resolve disputes related to seniority, pension, resignation, and recruitment, ensuring adherence to statutory provisions for fair service management.

Search Results for "Rule 7 3 of Civil Punjab Civil Service Rules Sub Rule 8"

Lachhman Dass Bansal VS Punjab State Power Corporation Limited

2016 0 Supreme(P&H) 1461 India - Punjab and Haryana

KULDIP SINGH

Prevention of Corruption Act - Reinstatement after conviction - Regulation 7.3 of the Main Services Regulations, 1972 - The court ... Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Regulation 7.3 of the Main Services Regulations, 1972 and compared it with similar regulations ... , and other allowances as if he was in service during the said period. ... The matter is already considered by this Court in Vinod Kumar Versus State of Punjab and others, (arising ou....

Lakhinder Singh VS State Of Haryana

1989 0 Supreme(P&H) 689 India - Punjab and Haryana

G.R.MAJITHIA

ARMY SERVICE - BENEFIT OF MILITARY SERVICE - PUNJAB GOVERNMENT, NATIONAL EMERGENCY (CONCESSION) RULES, 1965, RULE 4 - INTERPRETATION ... Punjab Government, National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965, and held that the period of military service shall count for increments ... He claimed the benefit of his military service to be counted towards civil service from January 9, 1963 to March 12, 1966, ....

State Of Punjab and Others vs Baljit Kaur

2024 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 6970 India - High Court of Punjab and Haryana

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J

The court analyzed Rule 4.7 of The Punjab Civil Services Rules, which governs the treatment of extraordinary leave regarding pension ... The respondent-plaintiff claimed the period from 09.04.1978 to 19.02.1981 as qualifying service for benefits, which was previously ... The court ultimately held that the period cannot count towards pension benefits and increments due to the rules governing extraordinary ... Said Rule 4.7#....

Benedict Kharmalki  VS State of Meghalaya

2000 0 Supreme(Gau) 175 India - Gauhati

A.K.PATNAIK

with sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of the Rules, 1990. ... as approved by the Appointing Authority in accordance with sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of the Rules, 1990. ... as approved by the Appointing Authority in accordance with sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of the Rules, 1990. ... ... 8. Sub-rul....

S.  Rangaswamy Naik and H. R.  Bhagwandas  VS B. R.  RavikanGowda

2013 0 Supreme(Kar) 1158 India - Karnataka

N.KUMAR, B.MANOHAR

, Pay and Pension) Rules, 1978, Rule 2(3) - Karnataka Civil Service Rules, Rule 32 - Karnataka Civil Service (Seniority) Rules, 1957 ... charge - Karnataka State Civil Services Act, 1978, Section 3(1) & 8 - Karnataka State Police Services Including Ministerial Services ... , Rules 2(a) & #HL....

Nawab Singh VS State Of Haryana

2005 0 Supreme(P&H) 920 India - Punjab and Haryana

S.S.NIJJAR, S.S.SARON

Seniority Dispute - Haryana Superior Judicial Service - Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963 - Rule 8, Rule 12 - The judgment ... , governed by the Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963. ... governed by the Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963. ... The Service conditions of the petitioners are governed by the Pu....

State Of Haryana VS S. K. Singhal

1999 4 Supreme 205 India - Supreme Court

S.N.PHUKAN, J.JAGANNADHA RAO

Service Law-Voluntary retire­ment-Punjab Civil Service Rules (Vol. ... As already stated Rule 2.2 of Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol. ... of Rule 2.2 of the Punjab Civil Service Regulation (Vol. ... The respondent had claimed that by virtue of the proviso to sub-clause (2) of Rule 5.32B of the Punjab....

District Panchayat, Kheda Through Chief Medical Officer VS Puhspaben Gordhandas Pandya

2009 0 Supreme(Guj) 16 India - Gujarat

K.M.THAKER

;(c) Gujarat Panchayat Service (Condition of Service) Rules, 1996 — Rule 3 — Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959 ... Once that is done, the resignation would become effective from 26-8-1975 in view of sub-rule(2) and consequently in light of sub-rule ... Tenure of her service appears to be of more than 1 year and that therefore 1 month’s notice w....

Vithal Waman Shelke VS High Court of Bombay, through registrar General

2016 0 Supreme(Bom) 1358 India - Bombay

S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, B.P.COLABAWALLA

Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008-Rules 6(8) and 8-Appointment to post of Judges. ... ... Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008-Rules 6(7) and 8-Selection ... (a) of sub-rule (3) above have been appointed and have not joined or have not been appointed for any reason. ... Placing reliance on Rule 8 of the Maharashtra....

KULJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

2023 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 4944 India - High Court of Punjab and Haryana

and recruitment of Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) from Register-C as provided in Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services ( ... ... - Even if the Corporation adopts the service rules applicable to the employees of the State, still the employees of the Corporation ... AND ARE NOT ENTITLED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SELECTION AND RECRUITMENT OF PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICES#HL_E....

SupremeToday Landscape Ad

Filter by Legal Phrase

SupremeToday Portrait Ad

Legal Issues on Supreme Today AI

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