Judgments
NARENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
SRI JAGANNATH TEMPLE MNG. COMMITTEE Vs. SIDDHA MATH & ORS.
LAL SHAH BABA DARGAH TRUST Vs. MAGNUM DEVELOPERS AND OTHERS
DR. JANET JEYAPAUL Vs. SRM UNIVERSITY AND ANR.
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE Vs. M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD.
M/S MASTER TOURS AND TRAVELS Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, SHRI AMARNATH JI SHRINE BOARD AND ORS , RESPONDENT NO.2 & 3
M/S GUJARAT INDUSTRIES & ORS. Vs. COMMR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE-I,AHMEDABAD
CALCUTTA STOCK EXCHANGE Vs. M/S BLB LIMITED
SHAKTI KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF J & K & ANR.
BASAVANTAPPA Vs. IRAPPA(D) BY LRS. & ORS
RAJBALA & ORS. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
It is a settled principle of law that curtailment of any right whether such a right emanates from common law, customary law or the Constitution can only be done by law made by an appropriate Legislative Body. Under the scheme of our Constitution, the appropriateness of the Legislative Body is determined on the basis of Full Judgment
BIPINCHANDRA GAMANLAL CHOKSHI & ORS. Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
PREMIUM GLOBAL SECURITIES PVT.LTD.& ORS Vs. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA&ANR
SRI CH.NARASIMHA RAO & ORS. Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER ELURU & ORS.
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. Vs. A.P.INDUSTRIAL INFRACTRCTURE CORPN.& ORS
SODEXO SVC INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD & ANR. Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.
SAT PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANR
SHOBHA RAM RATURI Vs. HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.& ORS
Having given our thoughtful consideration to the controversy, we are satisfied, that after the impugned order of retirement dated 31.12.2002 was set aside, the appellant was entitled to all consequential benefits. The fault lies with the respondents in not having utilised the services of the appellant for the period from 1.1.2003 to 31.12.2005. Had the appellant been allowed to continue in service, Full Judgment