employee pay scale reduction long time gap
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The Court further stated that any step of reduction in the pay scale and recovery from a government employee would be like a punitive action because the same has drastic civil and evil consequences.

Jharkhand High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court stated that recovery of excess amount from the employee was not permissible, if there was no misrepresentation or suppression by the petitioner.

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The High Court stated that that the person who asserts that there is equality in work has to prove the same first.

parity in pay scales
Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court regarded the High Court’s conclusion to be ‘unexceptionable’ since it did not equate two sets of employees in different organisations.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: Lok Pal Singh, J., allowed a writ petition which was filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vandana Kasrekar, J., allowed a writ petition and extended the benefit of 5th pay scale to the petitioner.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Punjab and Haryana High Court: A Division Bench of Rajiv Sharma and Harinder Singh Sindhu, JJ. dismissed the writ petition on the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Karnataka High Court: P.B. Bajanthri J., dismissed the petition for regularisation of the service on the ground that statutory rule recognizing such

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madhya Pradesh High Court: Petitioner had approached the Court before a bench of Sheel Nagu, J. under Article 226 of the Constitution

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: A Bench comprising of A.M. Sapre and Indu Malhotra, JJ. disposed of an appeal seeking enhanced severance package wherein the order

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: In the case where the validity of the Rules made in respect of the 6th Pay Commission by State of

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: In the matter where the rights of the posters working for the Indian Army were I n question, the Court