Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... in the light of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation projecting therein his claim and depicting therein his entitlement to continue in service till the age of 60 years.if such a representation is made by the petitioner within a period of six weeks, the same shall be considered and decided by the principal secretary/secretary (school education).department of education, government of punjab-respondent no.2 within a period of two months from the date of submission of such representation. ..... as per the policy decision of the government of punjab, petitioner is entitled to continue in service till the age of 60 years instead of 58 years.on attainment of which petitioner was retired on 30.11.2011. ..... 25.05.2011 (annexure p-4).against which appeal preferred by the state of punjab i.e.lpa no.1719 of 2011 stands dismissed by this court vide order dated 25.09.2012 (annexure p-5).petitioner has submitted a representation dated 20.10.2012 (annexure p-6) to the circle education officer, jalandhar school education department, punjab. ..... (oral) petitioner asserts that he is 60% orthopedically handicapped and is covered under the category of persons with disability under sections 2 (i) and 2(t) the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... court in lpa no.1719 of 2011 titled as state of punjab and another versus bhupinder singh, decided on 25.09.2012 (annexure p-5).petitioner is entitled to continue in service till the age of 60 years.he is to retire on 31.05.2013 and, therefore, in the light of the judgment passed by this court, petitioner has submitted a representation dated 29.01.2013 (annexure p-6) to the superintending engineer, kandi canal circle, hoshiapur-respondent no.4 with a copy to the principal secretary (irrigation).department of irrigation, government of punjab, punjab-respondent no.2. counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner, at this stage, ..... 25.05.2011 (annexure p-4) extending the benefit of the said instructions to all categories of disabled government employees as specified under section 2 (i) of the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation ) act, 1995. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
..... uoi -2011 (21) str 100 (pandh) had decided in similar situation that there is a service being rendered by the builder to the prospective customers and therefore service tax was rightly leviable and the order of the commissioner (appeal) to refund the tax collected is not legally ..... for the purposes of this sub-clause, construction of a complex which is intended for sale, wholly or partly, by a builder or any person authorised by the builder before, during or after construction (except in cases for which no sum is received from or on behalf of the prospective buyer by the builder or a person authorised by the builder before the grant of completion certificate by the authority competent to issue such certificate under any law for the time being in force) shall be deemed to be service provided by the builder to the ..... exhaustive data showing that all persons who bought the flats joined the project before the respondents started paying service tax and that nothing over and above the amount initially agreed to before the respondents started paying service tax will be required to come to a clear conclusion that there is no unjust enrichment in this ..... points out the fact that the honourable high court of punjab and haryana in the case of ..... opinion, therefore, irrespective of applicability of section 11b of the act, the doctrine can be invoked to deny the benefit to which a person is not otherwise entitled. ..... point out that the case before the high court of punjab and haryana in the case of g. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... ).2010(3) slr 663.devinder singh versus municipal council, sanaur, (2011) 6 scc 584.harjinder singh versus punjab state warehousing corporation, lpa no.1321 of 2009 (o&m) -4- (2010) 3 scc 19.and ramesh kumar versus state of haryana, 2010(1) sct 675.has held that if the termination of services of the daily wager is found to be contrary to the provisions of the act, he can be ordered to be reinstated with back wages, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and it cannot be accepted as a rule that such employee has ..... the labour court after providing due opportunity to the management as well as the workman, and after appreciating the evidence led by the parties, answered the reference in favour of the workman and found that the services of the workman were illegally terminated in violation of the provisions of section 25f and 25h of the act. ..... in our view, the learned single judge has rightly rejected the said contention in view of the decision in divisional manager, new india assurance company limited vs.a.sankaralingam, (2008) 10 scc 698.wherein it was held that even a daily wage employee, whose services were illegally terminated in gross violation of the provisions of the act, the reinstatement cannot be denied. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... *** tejinder singh dhindsa.j all the petitioners assert that they suffer from a disability element in excess of 40% and would be covered under the definition of disability as defined in section 2 (i) of the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995 (herein after referred to as the 1995 act).the state of punjab had issued a circular dated 16.2.1996 in terms of which a benefit of two years of service was extended to such employees, who suffered from the disability of blindness. ..... the state of punjab preferred l.p.a no.1719 of 2012 against the judgement dated 25.5.2011 passed in cwp no.7233 of 2010 and the aforementioned l.p.a has been dismissed in terms of judgement dated 25.9.2012. ..... in confining such benefit of extension of two years in service to only such disabled persons, who are blind and thereby discriminating against other disabled persons, who suffer from the disabilities as defined under the 1995 act. ..... in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh cwp no.21887 of 2011 (o&m) date of decision:26. ..... the aforementioned writ petition came to be allowed by a coordinate bench of this court in which it was concluded that all kinds of disabilities under the 1995 act are to be treated equally and as such there cannot be any discrimination between persons suffering from one kind of cwp no.21887 of 2011 (o&m) -2- disability or the other. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner even otherwise would be vested with the right to add to his qualifying service for superannuation pension a period of five years on the strength of rule 4.2(4) and clause (5) of chapter ii of the punjab civil services rules. ..... the present writ petition has been filed in terms of raising a plea that there is no such categorization in the 1995 act as regards the physically handicapped employees and, accordingly, the benefit of enhancement of the age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years could not be denied to the petitioner as he fell within the definition of the disabled employee under section 2(i) of the 1995 act.5. ..... accordingly, it is asserted that the petitioner suffers from a 45% disability element categorized as 'locomotor disability' and would be covered under the definition of disabled under the provisions of the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995 (for short to be referred as '1995 act').3. ..... civill writ petition no.7233 of 2010 was allowed by a co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 25.5.2011 and it was held that all kinds of disabilities under the 1995 act are to be treated equally and as such, there cannot be any discrimination between persons suffering from one kind of disability or the other. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... *** tejinder singh dhindsa.j the petitioner asserts that he suffers from a disability element in excess of 40% and would be covered under the definition of disability as defined in section 2 (i) of the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995 (herein after referred to as the 1995 act).the state of punjab had issued circulars dated 16.2.1996 and 17.1.2001 in terms of which a benefit of two years of service was extended to such employees, who suffered from the disability of blindness. ..... learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the controvers.raised in the present writ petition would be covered in terms of judgement dated 25.5.2011 passed in cwp no.7233 of 2010 titled as bhupinder singh versus state of punjab & others.on the statement made by learned counsel for the parties the present writ petition is allowed in terms of judgement passed in c.w.p.no.7233 of 2010. ..... the state of punjab preferred l.p.a no.1719 of 2012 against the judgement dated 25.5.2011 passed in cwp no.7233 of 2010 and the aforementioned l.p.a has been dismissed in terms of judgement dated 25.9.2012. ..... the aforementioned writ petition came to be allowed by a coordinate bench of this court in which it was concluded that all kinds of disabilities under the 1995 act are to be treated equally and as such there cwp no.19470 of 2011 (o&m) -2- cannot be any discrimination between persons suffering from one kind of disability or the other. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... they also seek a mandamus for acceptance of their applications and grant route permits applied for by them; (v) the petitioners in cwp nos.5611, 5591, 13557, 20859 & 22820 of 2011; 8783, 17880, 17869, 17876, 19880, 19898, 19899, 19900, 19912 of 2012 seek quashing of the punjab mini bus service scheme, 2010 notified on may 19, 2010 as it allegedly ultra vires the provisions of the motor vehicles act, 1988 and also the constitution of india. ..... guaranteed under article 19(1)(g) and authorizes the state to make any law, imposing in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the afore- stated right and, in particular enables the state to make law relating to the carrying on by the state, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the state, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise . ..... 99, 100 and 104 along with section 2[38].of the act, removed the doubts, if any were ever left, by setting out that once a scheme is published under section 100 in relation to any area or route or portion thereof, whether in complete or partial exclusion of other persons, no person other than the stus have a right to operate on the notified area or route except as provided in the scheme itself and wherever the stu in spite of grant of permit does not operate the service, the only recours.is to cwp no.15786 of 1999 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... no.7233 of 2010 titled as bhupinder singh versus state cm no.237 of 2013 in/and -2- cwp no.9841 of 2012 of punjab and others.decided on 25.5.2011 (annexure-p-4).wherein this court had extended it to all persons who would fall within the definition of 'disabled' as provided under the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995 (in short 'the act').lpa preferred by the state against the said order has also been dismissed by a division bench of this court on 25.9.2012, i.e.lpa no.1719 ..... he states that as per the policy decision of the government of punjab, petitioner is entitled to enhancement of date of his retirement to 60 years from 58 years.but the said benefit has not been granted to the petitioner only on the ground that he is not a totally blind person. ..... (oral) cm no.237 of 2013 prayer in this application is for listing of the case for hearing in the light of the fact that the letters patent appeal no.1719 of 2011 stands decided by a division bench of this court, vide judgment dated 25.9.2012 and the case was adjourned sine die, to be listed after the said decision. ..... in the light of the authoritative decision and settlement of law on this issue, petitioner is entitled to the extension of two years in service as he falls within the ambit of disability as defined in the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... of 60 years.petitioner, on the basis of the said judgment, has submitted a representation dated 03.02.2012 (annexure ..... in service till the age of 60 years.although the instructions restricted to the visual impaired (blind) employees but in cwp no.7233 of 2010 titled as bhupinder singh versus state of punjab and others.decided on 25.05.2011 (annexure p-6).the benefit has been extended to all employees who would be covered under the definition of 'disabled' as provided under the provisions of the persons with disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as '1995 act').since the petitioner fulfills the mandate of the 1995 act, he is entitled to extension in service till the age .....
Tag this Judgment!