Delhi High Court

93,075 judgments

Year:

Parveen Kumar v. UOI

26 Nov 2001 · C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:798

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging appointments of Assistant Directors in the Export Inspection Council, holding the petitioner ineligible and the appointments valid under the Recruitment Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 quo warranto Export Inspection Agency Recruitment Rules 1980

Prabhakar Tiwari v. Bank of India and Anr.

10 Nov 2001 · Jyoti Singh · 2023:DHC:805
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Delhi High Court held that the Prathama Pariksha Certificate is not equivalent to matriculation for appointment in public sector banks, affirming employer autonomy in prescribing eligibility qualifications.

employment petition_dismissed Significant Prathama Pariksha Certificate matriculation equivalence public sector banks Government of India Notification 2001

M/S VIMAL TELEKRTONIX PRIVATE LTD v. M/S TATA TELECOM LTD

21 Sep 2001 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7022-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Board resolution authorizing a director to sign all documents includes authority to institute suit, but claims for extra work require proper proof and work orders to succeed.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Board resolution Authority to institute suit Extra work claims Quantum meruit

Union of India v. Punita Devi

22 Jun 2001 · Vipin Sanghi; A.K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:377-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 8

The Delhi High Court held that compassionate appointment applications must be considered only within the concerned Ministry under the 5% vacancy ceiling, rejecting the claim for All India consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Office Memorandum 22 June 2001 5% direct recruitment quota Central Administrative Tribunal

LT.R.P.YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA

06 Jun 2001 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2015:DHC:1541-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal's refusal to summon certain officers and produce investigation reports, holding that the petitioner failed to establish the authenticity of documents and entitlement to such relief.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Armed Forces Tribunal Board of Investigation Court Martial Service termination

Shankar Singh v. UOI & Ors.

01 Jun 2001 · Kailash Gambhir; I. S. Mehta · 2015:DHC:2066-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of a draughtsman seeking higher pay scale under the Fifth Central Pay Commission, holding that prior benefits availed under earlier government orders preclude entitlement to revised pay scales.

administrative petition_dismissed pay scale revision Fifth Central Pay Commission draughtsman pay scale Department of Expenditure order

Vandhna Wadhwa v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

30 May 2001 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:9111-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court disposed of a habeas corpus petition concerning interim custody and visitation rights of a minor child, affirming Family Court jurisdiction over custody disputes.

family other habeas corpus child custody interim custody visitation rights

Parmod Kumar Kaushik & Ors. v. UOI & Ors.

27 Mar 2001 · S. Muralidhar; Sanjeev Narula · 2019:DHC:44-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that seniority fixation for Inspectors/Accountants absorbed on merit cannot be altered by counting prior service under deputation-related Office Memorandums, setting aside the revised seniority list that downgraded the petitioners.

service_law petition_allowed Significant seniority fixation absorption by selection deputation Indo-Tibetan Border Police

Dilbagh Kaur Chandok v. State

06 Feb 2001 · Mukta Gupta · 2019:DHC:7899

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the respondent in a Section 138 NI Act case, holding that unaccounted cash transactions are illegal and unenforceable liabilities.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act dishonour of cheque unaccounted cash transaction illegal transaction

S P Ashta v. Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board

12 Dec 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:5859-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pay scale upgradation for a Superintending Engineer depends on completion of 13 years of Group 'A' service counted from promotion to a Group 'A' post and that Central Government service guidelines do not apply to the Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant Central Pay Commission Superintending Engineer Group A service pay scale upgradation

Brahm Singh v. Pramila Devi

08 Jul 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7556-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal challenging a permanent injunction in favor of the respondent who proved ownership and possession of disputed land, holding that the appellant failed to establish any title or possession.

civil appeal_dismissed permanent injunction ownership possession agreement to sell

Shahnaz Ali & Anr v. Suresh Kumar Gera & Anr

04 Jun 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:1513-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of legal heirs seeking leave to defend a suit after their predecessor-in-interest withdrew the original leave to defend application and made admissions acknowledging liability.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant leave to defend legal heirs Order 37 CPC withdrawal of application

Balwan Singh & Ors. v. DDA & Ors.

17 May 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:2554-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Lt. Governor's revisional order annulling fraudulent land consolidation proceedings under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act without prior notice, recognizing pervasive fraud as unlawful consideration dispensing with the right to hearing.

property appeal_allowed Significant East Punjab Holdings Act Section 42 Consolidation proceedings Unlawful consideration

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7108-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld that pension benefits for SVRS optees are payable by DISCOMS, not the Pension Trust, clarified qualifying service rules under CCS Pension Rules, and mandated constitution of Arbitral Tribunals to determine additional contributions.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme CCS Pension Rules 1972 qualifying service Rule 48-B

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7109-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension payments to employees who took voluntary retirement under DISCOMs’ SVRS are payable by the DISCOMs and not the pension trust, clarified the interpretation of CCS Pension Rules on qualifying service, and upheld the mandatory constitution of arbitral tribunals to determine additional pension contributions.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme CCS Pension Rules 1972 qualifying service pension trust liability

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7110-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension liabilities for voluntary retirement under DISCOMS’ SVRS are payable by the DISCOMS, not the Pension Trust, and clarified the computation of qualifying service under CCS Pension Rules.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme Pension Trust liability CCS Pension Rules 1972 Qualifying service

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7098-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension payments for employees opting for special voluntary retirement schemes by electricity DISCOMS are the companies' liability, not the Pension Trust's, and clarified pension eligibility rules under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 including rounding of qualifying service but excluding five years’ weightage for eligibility.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme Pension Trust liability CCS Pension Rules 1972 qualifying service

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7112-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension payments to employees under Special Voluntary Retirement Schemes are initially payable by DISCOMS, not the Pension Trust, clarified the interpretation of CCS Pension Rules on qualifying service and pension eligibility, and upheld the constitution of Arbitral Tribunals to determine additional contributions.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme CCS Pension Rules 1972 qualifying service Rule 48-B

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7114-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension liabilities for employees opting for Special Voluntary Retirement Schemes lie with the DISCOMS, not the Pension Trust, clarified pension calculation rules, and upheld the necessity of Arbitral Tribunals to determine additional contributions.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Electricity Reforms Act, 2000 Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme Pension Trust liability CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972

Government of Delhi v. North Delhi Power Ltd

16 Mar 2000 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7113-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension payments to employees who voluntarily retired under DISCOMS’ special schemes are payable by the DISCOMS, not the Pension Trust, and clarified the interpretation of qualifying service under CCS Pension Rules.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme Pension Trust liability CCS Pension Rules 1972 qualifying service