Judgments
Sanjay Sondhi, Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Oth.
Dilip Hedau Versus Chhattisgarh Hastashilp Vikas Board & Oth.
M/s. Agarwal General Trading Co Versus General Manager, Indian Oil Corp. Limited
JITENDER @ KALLA Vs STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
MARUTI INSURANCE BUSINESS AGENCY LIMITED Vs MARUTI INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION SERVICES LIMITED
LALITA RAMESH LASE & ORS. Vs. JAIRAJ KANTILAL SONAWALA & ORS.
STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SANTOSH GUPTA AND ANR. ETC.
VIVEK NARAYAN SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA
Whether the notification dated 8th November 2016 is ultra vires Section 26(2) and Sections 7,17,23,24,29 and 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934; Does the notification contravene the provisions of Article 300(A) of the Constitution; Assuming that the notification has been validly issued under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 whether it is ultra vires Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution; Whether the limit on withdrawal of Full Judgment
AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Vs. GTL INFRA. LTD. & ORS. ETC.
C.I.T & ANR Vs. M/S YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD.
MOHAMMED ZUBAIR CORPORAL NO.781467-G Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SANJAY KUMAR ALIAS SUNNY
BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LTD. Vs. S. L. SEAL & ORS.
RAM NARESH RAWAT Vs. SRI ASHWINI RAY AND ORS.
From the aforesaid, it follows that though a 'permanent employee' has right to receive pay in the graded pay-scale, at the same time, he would be getting only minimum of the said pay-scale with no increments. It is only the regularisation in service which would entail grant of increments etc. in the pay-scale. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any substance in the contentions raised by Full Judgment