Digi - Legal Insights

Period of suspension of eight months should be included in Petitioners qualifying service for pension benefits, as Competent Authority did not specify otherwise.

Pension is an enforceable right and part of employees lawful entitlements under the relevant statutes.

Appointments made through Pavitra Portal aim for transparency but do not govern internal promotions.

Petitioners have made a compelling case for issuing directives to Deputy Director of Education, directing to include name of Petitioner No.1 in Shalarth System and grant Shalarth Identity to him.

Termination of Respondent No.4 has rightly been set aside by School Tribunal directing his reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service.

Respondent-APMCs late dispute over birth date appears to be an attempt to deny Petitioner his entitled service benefits after retirement hence, Respondent-APMC is directed to pay service benefits to Petitioner.

It is established that Petitioner No.1 was not formally appointed to Geography position but was given an additional charge for it hence, impugned order is deemed to be based on incorrect facts and is therefore subject to being quashed.

Municipal Corporations service rules provide for an upgrade after seven years of continuous service, which constitutes a vested right of employee that cannot be revoked without a valid amendment hence, Respondents cannot circumvent this by using a Government Resolution without amending rules directly.

Respondent Bank is directed to consider application of Petitioner for appointment of his son on compassionate ground and in lieu thereof grant lumpsum exgratia payment.

Administration has failed to respond to requests for Petitioners appointment based on compassionate grounds, effectively undermining intended purpose of appointment scheme hence, school Management directed to comply with Education Officers directives.

Petitioners did not provide sufficient grounds for intervention and transfers within district did not warrant extraordinary scrutiny under Article 226 of Constitution.

No evidence showed that employees of other CPSEs perform similar work, hold similar qualifications or discharge similar responsibilities hence, decision by MOIL to maintain distinct pay structure is justified for administrative efficiency.

Respondents-employees have proved before Industrial Court that they have completed 240 days of continuous service in one calendar year therefore, Industrial Court has rightly granted permanency in their favour.

Lack of a properly marked 'Domicile Certificate' should not disqualify a candidate whose entire record is from Maharashtra.

Voluntary retirement, while considered premature, does not deprive an employee of their pension benefits.

Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 directed to propose pension calculations that incorporate 50% of Petitioners Part-Time service, under old pension scheme.

Denial of bifurcation by Respondents No.2 and No.3 lacked proper consideration of relevant factors and well-being of Petitioners, thus failing to meet legal requirements.

Impugned Order was upheld, affirming the Employees reinstatement with back wages, ruling out any unreasonable or arbitrary actions by authorities.

Petitioner was elected on a reserved seat based on false representation of holding a validity certificate for OBC category, leading to voiding of her election.

Decision of Scrutiny Committees upheld, asserting there was no illegality in interpretation of eligibility norms and without an official equivalence certificate, Petitioner cannot be deemed eligible to teach Social Science under Article 226 of Constitution.