AGRICULTURE MARKET COMMITTEE,HINDAUN vs OM PRAKASH BANSAL . — C.A. No. 3291/2014

Case under Section XV. Status: DISPOSED.

CNR: SCIN010031592006

DISPOSED

Filing Date

01-Feb-2006

Registration No

C.A. No. 3291/2014

Diary Number

3159/2006

Order Date

05-Mar-2014

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Data as of 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XV

Petitioner(s)

AGRICULTURE MARKET COMMITTEE,HINDAUN

Respondent(s)

OM PRAKASH BANSAL .

Adv. VIJAY KUMAR P. D. SHARMA

Orders

05-Mar-2014 ROP - of Main Case
04-Mar-2014 ROP - of Main Case
03-Mar-2014 ROP - of Main Case
24-Jan-2014 ROP
24-Sep-2013 ROP
26-Aug-2013 ROP
12-Aug-2013 ROP
16-Jul-2013 ROP
12-Jul-2013 ROP
15-Apr-2013 ROP
18-Mar-2013 ROP
30-Nov-2012 ROP
31-Aug-2012 ROP
21-Aug-2012 ROP
08-May-2012 ROP
10-Apr-2012 ROP
22-Mar-2012 ROP
25-Jan-2012 ROP
02-Dec-2011 ROP
14-Oct-2011 ROP
23-Sep-2011 ROP
05-Aug-2011 ROP - of Main Case
11-Jul-2011 ROP
05-Jul-2011 ROP
13-Apr-2011 ROP
23-Feb-2011 ROP
26-Nov-2010 ROP - of Main Case
27-Sep-2010 ROP - of Main Case
16-Jul-2010 ROP
06-May-2010 ROP
16-Apr-2010 ROP - of Main Case
05-Apr-2010 ROP
23-Feb-2010 ROP
08-Feb-2010 ROP
27-Jan-2010 ROP
27-Nov-2009 ROP
13-Nov-2009 ROP
07-Sep-2009 ROP
17-Aug-2009 ROP
12-Aug-2009 ROP
03-Aug-2009 ROP
15-Jul-2009 ROP
09-Jul-2009 ROP
16-Jun-2009 ROP
02-Apr-2009 ROP - of Main Case
16-Jan-2009 ROP
12-Jan-2009 ROP
01-Sep-2008 ROP
30-Apr-2008 ROP - of Main Case
14-Mar-2008 ROP
12-Mar-2008 ROP - of Main Case
15-Feb-2008 ROP
24-Jan-2008 ROP - of Main Case
19-Nov-2007 ROP - of Main Case
17-Sep-2007 ROP
07-Dec-2006 ROP - of Main Case
16-Nov-2006 ROP - of Main Case
27-Sep-2006 ROP - of Main Case
24-Aug-2006 ROP - of Main Case
17-Apr-2006 ROP
03-Apr-2006 ROP - of Main Case
20-Mar-2006 ROP - of Main Case
View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Summary: C.A. No. 003291/2014 The Supreme Court dismissed the Agriculture Market Committee's appeals challenging pension eligibility for employees. The Court upheld the High Court's ruling that Rule 10(2) of the Pension Rules (requiring provident fund contributions for pension) was unconstitutional. It held that employees continuously employed since their initial State Agriculture Department appointments could claim pension counting full service from appointment dates. The Court directed appellants to pay respondents Rs. 5,000 each as costs, deeming the litigation unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Supreme Court of India All courts →

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case