1) UNION CABINET TODAY DECLARED THE CONSTITUTION OF 7TH PAY COMMISSION FOR CENTRAL GOVT EMPLOYEES & SEPARATE PAY COMMISSION FOR ARMED FORCES.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION WILL BE EFFECTIVE FROM 01/01/2016.
2) THE CONTEMPT PETITION OF PRE-2006 PENSIONERS REGARDING NON-COMPLIANCE OF CAT PB JUDGEMENT IN OA 655/2010 CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 25/09/2013.
UPON HEARING BOTH THE COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS,THE COURT ORDERED THE GOI TO ISSUE THE ORDER FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JUDGEMENT & APPEAR BEFORE IT ON 10/10/2013 OR ELSE GOI HAS TO FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION WILL BE EFFECTIVE FROM 01/01/2016.
2) THE CONTEMPT PETITION OF PRE-2006 PENSIONERS REGARDING NON-COMPLIANCE OF CAT PB JUDGEMENT IN OA 655/2010 CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 25/09/2013.
UPON HEARING BOTH THE COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS,THE COURT ORDERED THE GOI TO ISSUE THE ORDER FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JUDGEMENT & APPEAR BEFORE IT ON 10/10/2013 OR ELSE GOI HAS TO FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS.
Dear sir,
ReplyDeleteit is not known whether seperate pay commission for AFs has been constituted or otherwise.
brgds
Dear Sir,
DeleteThe pay commission is yet to be constituted,it is only declared, lets wait for the cabinet resolution in this regard
I wish UOI issues orders before 10.10.2013. Otherwise, they have to face the" music" from CAT PR. BENCH.
ReplyDeleteI also pray that they should not be "inane" to go in for a curative petition !
Dear Mr. Imayan,
DeleteI support your view
Sir, Is there any chance to UOI to protect them self against BOLT FROM THE BLUE (CATs order of 25/9/2013)
ReplyDeleteDearSir,
ReplyDeleteIt may take little time but UOI has to face the defeat at last
“SLP filed by UOI in 3 other cases on Modified Parity (connected with SLP which had already been dismissed on 29-7-2013 - came up for hearing on 7-10-2013 in SC. The hearing was adjourned to 1-11-2013 without admitting the SLP. Request from ASG for stay on contempt proceedings was refused by the Bench.”
ReplyDelete