Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC3; 2007(13)SCALE23; (2008)1SCC354; 2007AIRSCW6986.
s.b. sinha, j.1. leave granted.2. this appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 24.5.2006 passed by a division bench of the high court of delhi at new delhi in cm nos. 9506/2004 & 4393/2006 and w.p.(c) no. 13604/2004 & 13605/2004 affirming an order dated 17.12.2003 passed by the central administrative tribunal, delhi bench, delhi in original application no. 864/2003.3. the basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. central public works department belonging to the central government has its own service rules framed under the proviso appended to article 309 of the constitution of india, known as 'ministry of urban affairs and employment (department of urban development) central engineering (civil) group 'a' service rules, 1996' (rules). the said rules came into force with effect from 28.10.1996. whereas rule 3 of the rules provides for 'constitution of the service', rule 4 provides for 'grade, strength and its review'. the first schedule appended to the rules provides for the posts in the central engineering service, group 'a'. the hierarchy of the officers has also been provided therein. rules govern the field of recruitment as also the cadre strength. despite the fact that the terms and conditions of the employees belonging to the said cadre are governed by the statutory rules, on or about 1.8.2002, a purported office order was issued, the relevant part whereof reads as under:.to maintain interdisciplinary coordination amongst various disciplines of cpwd, it has .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC1590; JT1992(6)SC5; 1993LabIC1304; (1993)IILLJ801SC; 1992(2)SCALE823; 1993Supp(2)SCC399; [1992]Supp1SCR885; 1993(2)SLJ178(SC)
orderb.p. jeevan reddy, j.1. leave granted.2. heard counsel for the parties.3. with a view to bring the representation of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in certain civil services in the state of karnataka to the prescribed level, the governor framed the karnataka civil services (special recruitment of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes candidates to certain group 'a' and group 'b' posts) rules, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'rules'). they were brought into force on 11.4.1985, the date of publication in the official gazette. the cadres in group 'a' and group '8', to which the said rules are made applicable are mentioned in the schedule (against sl. nos. 1 to 5) and in the lists given below the schedule (hereinafter referred to compendiously as the schedule) appended to rules. rule 2 defines the expressions 'board' and 'schedule'. 'board' means a board constituted under rule 4(1).4. rules 3 and 4 which constitute the core of the rules read as follows:3. appointment of scheduled castes or scheduled tribes candidates to certain group 'a' and group 'b' posts.-notwithstanding anything contained in.(i) the karnataka recruitment of gazetted probationers (appointment by competitive examinations) rules, 1966; (ii) the karnataka state civil services (direct recruitment by selection) rules, 1973; (iii) the karnataka civil services (general recruitment) rules, 1977; (iv) the rules of recruitment specially made in respect of posts referred to in the schedule; or(v) any .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC3775; JT1999(7)SC409; 1999(6)SCALE177; (1999)8SCC44; [1999]Supp3SCR67; 2000(2)SLJ19(SC); 2000(1)LC32(SC)
ordersrinivasan, j.1. factual canvasthe earliest appeal in this batch was filed by the state of haryana and the director of public instructions, haryana. the appeal came to be filed in this court in somewhat peculiar circumstances. the order of the high court against which the appeal was filed was passed by a single judge of the high court on 3rd december, 1988 in c.w.p. 7122/88 on the basis of consent of counsel on both sides. the order was in the following terms:the parties' counsel agree that this petition is squarely covered by a full bench judgment of this court reported as bhagwan dutt sharma and ors. v. state of haryana and anr. : (1997)iillj1000sc . there will be an order in terms of the ratio given in that case.2. the said writ petition was filed in the high court by the respondents in the appeal. they were working as teachers/masters/ mistresses in different schools of haryana. they had acquired post graduate qualifications while in service. the relevant particulars were given by them in the writ petition. according to them, the erstwhile state of punjab had issued a circular on : (1975)iillj540sc raising the pay scales of the teachers w.e.f. 1st may, 1957 and that it was decided that the teachers would be entitled to pay scales according to qualifications possessed by them irrespective of the post held by them. it was their case that the policy decision of the punjab government was adopted by the haryana government after it was formed. the latter issued an order .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(2)AWC1494; (2001)2UPLBEC1149
s. r. singh, j. 1. bottom-line common questions of seminal importance that surface of determination in this bunch of writ petitions are two fold : firstly, whether the posts of principal in government aided private degree colleges/post graduate colleges affiliated or associated under the provisions of the u.p. state universities act. 1973, can be subsumed within the sweep of the u.p. public services (reservation for scheduled castes. scheduled tribes and other backward classes) act, 1994 (abbreviated to 'u.p. reservation act. 1994) and secondly, whether methodology adopted by the u.p.higher education services commission for screening out candidates, suffers from the taint of arbitrariness.2. the reliefs recapitulated in substance, arc that the advertisement no. 25 of 1998, the selections made pursuant to the said advertisement, and the guidelines formulated by the u.p. higher education services commission, be quashed and the commission be enjoined to re-advertise the posts sans applying there the rule of reservation as embodied in the u.p, reservation act. 1994 and prepare fresh guidelines for screening out the candidates taking into reckoning the qualifications as amended by the university grants commission.3. besides sri r. b. singhal and sri r,c. shukla, we have also heard sarvsri r.c. srivastava, r.n. singh and sri ashok khare, learned senior advocates appearing for petitioners in their respective cases and sri kripa shanker singh, standing counsel appearing for the state .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC1204; 1999LC369(SC); 1999(107)ELT3(SC); [1999(81)FLR830]; JT1999(1)SC632; 1999(1)SCALE612; (1999)3SCC384; [1999]1SCR809; 2000(1)SLJ24(SC)
m. jagannadha rao, j.1. we have before us writ petition - w.p. 651 of 1997 and certain interlocutory applications bearing nos. la. 4, 6 to 8 filed in an earlier writ petition no. 306 of 1988. the said w.p. no. 306 of 1988 was disposed of by this court by judgment dated 22.11.1996 all india federation of central excise v. union of india : (1997)1scc520 . aggrieved by certain subsequent events, various parties have filed the writ petitions and i.as.2. for the purpose of appreciating the disputes in these matters, it is necessary to set out the following facts:the feeder categories for promotion to the posts in group a services constituting the indian customs and central excise (group a) service are:(a) superintendents of central excise, group b (which consists of all promotees from lower cadres;(b) superintendents of customs (p) group b (again all promotees from lower cadres); and(c) (i) customs appraisers group b (consisting of officers directly recruited through upsc;(ii) promotees from the feeder-cadres of customs examiners in ratio of 50:50).3. during the pendency of the earlier writ petition, w.p. no. 306 of 1988, the government of india came forward with certain proposals dated 8.6.1989 to resolve the long standing grievances of various groups of officers and to shorten litigation. this court heard all the parties and their respective views on these proposals and accepted them. so far as the inter-se dispute between the two sub-categories in the third feeder category (c) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1997(7)SC594; 1997(5)SCALE711; (1997)11SCC758; 1997(2)LC645(SC); (1997)3UPLBEC1979
m. rao j.1. leave granted in s.l.p. (c) no. 7076 of 1995.2. these cases raise common questions relating to seniority of officers in the rank of commandant/security officer/asstt. inspector general/dy. director/divisional security officer. the rules which are relevant are the railway protection force (superior officers) recruitment rules, 1974 (hereinafter called the '1974 rules') and the railway protection force (group a & b posts) recruitment rules, 1981 (hereinafter called the '1981 rules'). eight writ petitions filed in various high courts have been transferred to this court and registered as transferred petitions, to be disposed of alongwith civil appeal arising out of the judgment of a division bench of the calcutta high court on appeal from the judgment of a learned single judge of that court. we also have before us an independent writ petition no. 98 of 97 filed under article 32 of the constitution of india.3. before referring to the facts of the cases it will be necessary to refer to the hierarchy of posts and the mode of recruitment and promotion under the 1974 rules as well as under the 1981 rules and the conditions for eligibility for promotions.4. under the 1974 rules the hierarchy of posts was as follows. initially the recruitment was to the post of assistant commandant/assistant security officer in class-ii group b (hereinafter called generally as assistant commandant cadre for convenience) in the pay scale of rs. 350-900. further promotion from that post was to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996IXAD(SC)179; JT1997(10)SC630; 1996(8)SCALE546; (1997)1SCC520; [1996]Supp9SCR90
k. venkataswami, j.1. the petitioners in w.p.(c) nos. 306 and 1200 of 1988 challenge the constitutionality of rule 18(2) of the indian customs and central excise service group 'a' rules 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'rule'). the petitioners in w.p. (c) no. 1200/88 additionally challenge the list of seniority published on 22.8.1988 pending disposal of w.p.(c) no. 306/88. the petitioners in w.p. (c) no. 1093/90 have proved for the issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to make promotions strictly in accordance with law namely, following rules 19(2) and 20 of the 1987 rules and based on the seniority list dated 12.9.1984 and also for certain other connected reliefs.2. common arguments were addressed by counsel on both sides and, therefore, these writ petitions and connected interlocutory applications are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. let us briefly state the background facts leading to the filing of these petitions.4. the feeder cadre for promotion to indian customs and central excise. group a services are:(a) superintendents of central excise. group 'b':(b) superintendents of customs (p) group b : and(c) customs appraisers, group 'b'-(i) recruited directly through upsc, as(a) non-experts on the basis of all-india civil services exam., and(b) experts on the basis of specific requisitions placed with the upsc, and: (ii) promoted from the feeder-cadres of customs examiner,5. the group 'b' posts in the feeder-cadres (a) and (b) above (i.e. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2004(77)DRJ497
gita mittal, j.1. the petitioner in this writ petition is the mother of a deceased soldier late ex-rfn. kadar khan seeking quashing of orders dated 28th march, 2002 and 14th march, 2002 passed by the army group insurance scheme(respondent no. 5 in the present petition) informing her that the insurance benefits available to her son, the deceased soldier, would be released in favor of his widow in the event that the petitioner was unable to produce any orders in her favor of stay from a court of law.2. the facts giving rise to the present petition briefly stated are that the late ex-rfn. kadar khan was married to one smt. murshida parveen(respondent no. 6) on 19th june, 2000 as per muslim law and customs. late ex-rfn. kadar khan was enrolled in the indian army on the 27th july, 1998 having been allotted service no. 2845517 and was posted with 15 rajputana rifles. late ex-rfn. kadar khan had proceeded for his leave on the 20th august, 2001. according to the petitioner, the relations of the deceased with respondent no. 6 were estranged and that she took her husband to her parents house in village budhana on the 27th september, 2001. it is further alleged that late ex-rfn. kadar khan died that night after taking his dinner and that the death was in suspicious circumstances. despite intimation to the police and representations(under section 26 of the army act) to the respondents no. 1-5, they were not granting or releasing the terminal benefits to which heirs of late ex-rfn. kadar .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(2)AWC1225
s. rafat alam, j.1. this special-appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of the learned single judge dated 19.1.2001 in writ petition no. 2354 of 2001 whereby the learned single judge dismissed the writ petition challenging the office order notice dated 23.12.2000 retiring the petitioner with effect from 31.1.2001 on attaining the age of 58 years.2. the short question involved in the present appeal is as to whether the age of retirement of consolidation lekhpal is 60 years or 58 years?3. we have heard smt. poonam srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and sri u. k. pandey, learned standing counsel on behalf of the state-respondents. with the permission of the court, they have also filed their written arguments, which are on record.4. it appears that the petitioner-appellant was appointed as consolidation lekhpal on 11.10.1979 in the pay scale of rs. 330-7-365-8-381-405-9-450 in the district of basti. it is not in dispute that his date of birth is 10.1.1943 . he was however, served with the office order/notice dated 23rd january. 2001 informing that in view of rule 5 of volume ii. part ii to iv of financial hand book and also in view of the instructions issued from time to time by the state government, he would retire on 31.1.2001 on attaining 58 years of age. being aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the aforesaid order notice before this court by moving writ petition no. 2354 of 2001 on the ground, inter alia, that the post of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VIIAD(SC)233; AIR1997SC95; 1996(2)ALT(Cri)770; 1997CriLJ90; JT1996(9)SC138; 1996(7)SCALE517; (1996)6SCC323; [1996]Supp7SCR432; 1996(2)LC770(SC)
order1. the people of india, that is bharat, gave to themselves a written constitution effective from 26th january, 1950, ordaining in article 74 that there shall be a council of ministers with the prime minister as the head, to aid and advice the president. the importance of the office of the prime minister in a parliamentary democracy is well understood and needs no elaboration. in the course of time, on october 31, 1984, the people of india suffered assassination of their prime minister, shrimati indira gandhi, during a period of great turmoil and tumult. her son, shri rajiv gandhi then stepped forward to serve the country as prime minister, when the cult of violence had begun and was expected to gain round. during his tenure, need was felt to provide high security to the prime minister of india and the members of his immediate family, since there had been several threats to his life. a bill which led to the passing of the special protection group act, 1988 (for short the 'act') was introduced in the parliament by giving out the following:statement of objects and reasons1. during the last few years, terrorism has been steadily assuming menacing proportions in various parts of the country and abroad. in addition to indulging in wanton killings, arson, looting and other heinous crimes with the object to overawing the government, terrorists aim to destabilise the democratically elected government by resorting to selective killing of prominent members of the public including .....
Tag this Judgment!