Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Roundup April 8 - April 14, 2024

Nominal Index:Suneet Singh Jaryal vs State of HP & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 10Usha Rani vs State of HP & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 11UCO Bank & Ors. vs Chaman Singh 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 12State of H.P. and another vs. Jai Ram Kaundal 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 13Rakesh Sharma vs. Indian Oil Corporation and another 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 14Judgments/Orders: Pensionary Benefits Cannot Be Withheld For An Indeterminate Period On Ground Of Lack Of Resources: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: Suneet Singh Jaryal vs State of HP & AnrCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 10A single judge bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Satyen Vaidya while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Suneet Singh Jaryal vs State of HP & Anr held that the state government cannot withhold pensionary benefits for an indefinite period on the pretext of financial constraints.Family Annual Income Needs To Be Considered For Determining Eligibility Of Anganwadi Workers, Not Individual Annual Income: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: Usha Rani vs State of HP & OrsCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 11A single judge bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Ranjan Sharma while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Usha Rani vs State of HP & Ors. held that to determine the eligibility for appointment as Anganwari Workers, the family annual income of the female candidate must be under Rs. 8000 per annum and not the individual annual income of the female candidate.Service Provided For Period Of Three Months And Above Shall Be Treated As One Half Year For The Purpose Of Calculating Total Service Period: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: UCO Bank & Ors. vs Chaman SinghCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 12A division bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge, while deciding Letters Patent Appeal in the case of UCO Bank & Ors. vs Chaman Singh held that service provided by an employee for the period of three months and above shall be treated as one half year (6 months) for the purpose of calculating total service period.Person Appointed Against Scheduled Caste Or Scheduled Tribe Quota, Cannot Later Claim Reservation Under Ex-Serviceman Quota: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title : State of H.P. and another vs. Jai Ram KaundalCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 13A division bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, and Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, while deciding Letters Patent Appeal held that once a person is appointed against Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe quota, then later they cannot claim reservation under ex-serviceman quota.Burden Of Proving Employer-Employee Relationship Primarily Rests Upon Who Asserts Its Existence: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: Rakesh Sharma vs. Indian Oil Corporation and anotherCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 14A division bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja, while deciding a Letters Patent Appeal held that the burden of proving the employer-employee relationship primarily rested upon the person who asserted its existence, and once the person asserting to be an employee of the management gives evidence in their favour, then only the burden will shift on the management to give evidence to counter such claims of the employee.

Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Roundup April 8 - April 14, 2024

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags