The Home Secretary Chandigarh Administration Ut and Ors. Vs Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench and Ors.

The Tribunal has accepted the claim of respondent No.2 for retiral benefits only on the ground that similarly placed Lecturers in the Education Department have been granted notional dates of appointments so as to bring them within the ambit of old pension scheme.

¶17

Though its appears to us that the same Officer is heading the Transport as well as Education Department yet the writ petition is conspicuously silent on the point of alleged discrimination. We thus dismiss the same for want of proper particulars but with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action explaining a specific ground whether any benefit of notional appointments has been granted to the employees of Education Department and

¶18

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.07.23 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CWP No.14509 of 2015 [2] is so, why a uniform policy in this regard has not been adopted?

¶20

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE July 22, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

¶21

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.07.23 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

The Home Secretary Chandigarh Administration Ut and Ors. v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Home Secretary Chandigarh Administration Ut and Ors. v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurnam Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ps Sanghi & Ors. Vs the Registrar Firms & Societies & Ors.

Pardeep Kumar Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Comptroller & Auditor General of India & Ors. Vs Central Administrative Tribunal and Ors.

Sandeep Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jai Pal Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.