Vinod Patidar
14 February 2014 at 18:43
A direct recruitment exam was conducted by Rajasthan Public Sevice Commision(RPSC)for the post of Headmaster,Govt.Secondary School (A post in Rajasthan Education Service) and RPSC provisinally recommmended 1710 candidates to the department for posting in a single list.Department ordered posting of approx 1520 candidates on 13/9/2013 and those are succeed to join before January 1st,and thus eligible to get annual increment on July 1st,next year.Rest candidates not get posting orders till 10/1/2014 due to election code of conduct and other adminstrative reasons.Due to this deprived from Annual increment on 1st of july that year due to service less than six month on July 1st.Many candidates who joined after January due to delayed orders are bearing high rank in selection merit from many candidates who joined on or before January 1st.
As par rules governing Seniority, Seniority is based on Selection Merit.
Now, due to this many candidates who joined on or before 1st January and junior to many candidates who joined after 1st january,are getting more basic pay than those who are seniors,due to their high rank in merit.
Can this candidtes can claim notional benefit eqaul to those who are joined before 2nd January.
Please give reference of any court decision on similar matter.
abdul salam
14 February 2014 at 18:42
Dear Legal Experts,
One of my friend who is a land lady and propertied women had got destitute widow certificate from taluk office by giving false declaration as bpl through her brother who was a village administrative officer. The thasildhar also had colluded with them knowingly and issued the certificate .On the basis of the destitute widow certificate she got an employment in a school overlooking the real destitute person .She has constructed 2 houses one of which is by encroaching her in-laws land instead of constructing it in her own land which is just opposite to in-laws land .Now she is demanding her share in the mother in-laws land .Her in-laws side are refusing to give her a share quating the Islamic law of inheritance where the pre-deceased son has no right to claim. ( Her husband death-2000, her father-in laws death in 1965 and mother in laws death in 2002)Further, they are suspecting the death of her husband all of sudden after a big quarrel between husband and wife.
After 13 years, the affected real destitute women has given complaint to the higher authorities ,to take the disciplinary action against her for giving a false certificate and to prosecute her as per law. Who is responsible for her proplems? 1)her self 2) her brother 3) the thasildhar. what is the law says. How to help her to comeout successfully from this problem. What will be the maximum and minimum punishment and how to avoid that punishment. The thasildhar and her brother (vao) are drawing pension. Will they be included in the case Her claim for in-laws land share is maintainable in the court of law .what she has to do now .Please give your expert comments/advise to help the widow to solve her all proplems.
Thanking you,
SAPNA
Raghu
13 February 2014 at 21:26
Hi,
My wife has been selected as a Civil Asst Surgeon and just delivered a baby before the orders are issued with Govt of AP. We heard that she is not eligible for the maternity leave as the baby was born before the appointment order was given. She is facing lot of problem as she has to travel with one week baby and she also had casaerian due to which she is facing lot of stress. Please help us to avail this maternity benefit.
Thank you,
SARAVANAN.R
13 February 2014 at 20:57
Respected Sir,
On reading through the article of our experts, I came to know about Grievance Settlement mechanism as envisaged under ID Amendment act, 2010. Now whether any organisations or companies employing more than 20 people in India have set up a grievance settlement mechanism. Has the FICCI or the CII or chamber of commerce supported this welfare move envisaged under ID Act.
Saravanan Radhakrishnan
Shyampurwala
13 February 2014 at 19:16
Dear All,
I am working in a ltd Company last 4 year . One day in afternoon my boos call to me in HR dept and presser on me wright your resignation without any fault from my side .your are not adjusting in corporate culture saying barbel not in wright en. After 6 month complete I had got confirmation letter with increment & promotion with best employee ward of the year (2) second year I have got increment & promotion. (3) Third year I have got increment & promotion . (4) Four th year I have got increment with company............. Now my question is all these are going quite well than why company exit to me without notice............ Can I go Labour court against to company for this be-heaver.
Regards...
V K VIJAYARAGHAVAN
12 February 2014 at 23:36
Sirs
A Ltd company having incurred losses for 10 years wants to make settlement to workers in one of its factories and has started another factory in another location an year ago due to certain advantages . How to go about it under ID act
prateekkkk
12 February 2014 at 21:42
rESPECTED EXPERTS,
I HAVE FILLED A CASE IN OFFICE OF CHIEF COMMISIONER, PERSON WITH DISABILITIES... I WANT MY ADVOCATE BE APPEAR BEFORE CHIEF COMMISIONER IN HEARING...IT IS A judicial proceeding within the meaning of sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code and the Chief Commissioner, the Commissioner, the competent authority, shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
CAN I HAVE POWER TO ASK FOR APPEAREANCE OF MY ADVOCATE ON MY BEHALF ???
dhiraj
12 February 2014 at 19:52
dear sir
iwas working in a chennai based company for 3 years and later resigned with the company after getting the releivng letter,but now after 4 years later i want to withdraw my PF money due to unemployment for 4 months and Health issues .the previous comapny is delaying the process of attesting the documents sent and my withdrawal procedure for more than 2 months.they do not respond on the phone neither by mails and give un circumstantial reasons for delay, i have xerox copies of documents submitted and also the pod copy from courier for receivng documents at their end.
Please suggest me the directions in order the employee does attestation at earliest,can i submit the same documents to local PF office in other place other than chennai by getting attested documents through a gazetted officer or post master.
Dheeraj
MAHENDRA
12 February 2014 at 15:37
Hello Sir,
My father had Work more than 15 years (Around 1980-1985) With his Brother in Mumbai and staying with them. Because of dispute between them they did non paid any profit or any amount. during that period only basic living expenses given. there was no partnership aggrement between them.
Please suggest me what to do now.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Lpa or slp in the given situation
Ld. Experts/ advocates of L/C,
In view of rejection of early hearing application [on account of being senior citizen having sickness and disability] by single bench/ High Court, I approached the Division Bench by way of LPA.
Cogent reasons for early hearing, as submitted in the application, are briefly reproduced below for reference:
------
1. (a) The RESPONDENT-APPLICANT IS A SENIOR CITIZEN [weaker group 62 years of age as at 26 May 2014]. Cases of senior citizens are privileged to early hearing as per the Apex Court directions and also various High Courts including this Hon’ble Court, especially Bombay High Court which reduced the age for entitlement from 65 years to 60 years on 3rd December 2013 in terms: “The Chief Justice and Judges have now directed that precedence be given by courts for hearing and final disposal of the cases wherein one of the parties has attained the age of sixty years and above.
(b) TERMINATION WAS MORE THAN 11 YEARS AGO ON 17.07.2002: AWARD BY LABOUR COURT WAS ON 01.08.2006 and it was challenged by the Petitioner non-applicant by way of a writ petition in garb of appeal in disguise as substantiated in CM No. 10378/12 [on record] and is pending.
2. Respondent-applicant is suffering from sickness and disablement:
(i) Respondent-applicant workman is hard-of-hearing aggravated due to discrimination by the Management as he was not provided with equipments/ uniforms to withstand the severe cold at the place where he was posted situated at 4000ft. altitude near Kullu, Himchal.
(ii) The respondent-appellant workman has breathing problem which was aggravated due to discrimination from other employees at remote place as he was not provided said equipments by petitioner non-applicant, to withstand severe cold at remote place situated at 4000ft. altitude despite several requests [craves leave to produce proof/communications as and when produced] and had to take treatment from a prominent hospital which prescribed costly medicine and inhaler for survival.
(iii) Moreover, the victim was given a forced retirement by the Petitioner non-applicant w.e.f. 26.05.2012 allegedly for attainment of 60 years by discriminating him from contemporaries/colleagues [ref: list attached page -------- of LPA Annx “A2”].
(iv) Respondent-applicant has no livelihood as he was not given bonafide retirement benefits although the statute [Sec-60(1)(g) CPC] precludes authorities from attaching retirement benefits and is beyond attachment by any court of law and finds it difficult to get medical treatment.
(v) Violation of Para 72(5) of EPF Act: To tide over the situation, Respondent-applicant submitted necessary forms to Petitioner non-applicant for withdrawal of p.f. accumulations on 25.11.2003 by Speed post vide No. ED324506157IN. As per Para 72(5) of the EPF Act, an employer is duty bound to forward duly filled in and attested claim application to the respective PF Office within “5 days of its receipt” and is craving to get medical treatment. Further it is reiterated that retirement benefits cannot be attached by any court of law under Sec.60(1)(g) CPC and relying on various Apex Court rulings. The Management violated provisions of EPF Act which was not complied till 17.01.2014 and thus attracted punishment as per law.””””
The D/B gave the liberty to approach Single Bench with the prayer. Accordingly approached Single Bench who rejected the application for early hearing application taking the version of respondent as gospel truth and without giving me opportunity to be heard.
IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHETHER SLP IN APEX COURT HAS TO BE FILED AGAINST THE ORDER
OR
IS IT OPEN TO APPROACH DIV. BENCH AGAIN WITH THE SAME REQUEST?
THANK YOU .