SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 50

R.C.LAHOTI, BRIJESH KUMAR
A. P. S. R. T. C. – Appellant
Versus
S. Narsagoud – Respondent


ORDER

The respondent was a Conductor, and hence a workman, in the employment of the appellant Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. He remained absent from duty between 5.6.1982 and 8.8.1982 on the first occasion and again between 13.10.1992 and 1.11.1992 on the second occasion. A chargesheet was served on him alleging the period of absence to be an unauthorised absence from duty. The respondent pleaded that he had remained absent because of ill health - due to jaundice for the first period of absence and due to chest pain and fever for the second period of absence from duty. In the departmental inquiry proceedings the two charges referable to two periods of absence from duty framed against the respondent were found to be proved and the explanation for absence as offered by him was found not to have been substantiated. The respondent was inflicted with the punishment of removal from service.

2. The respondent raised a dispute under Section 2(A)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as amended in its application to the State of Andhra Pradesh by A.P. Amendment Act No. 32 of 1987. The Labour Court by its Award dated 24.12.1997 held that no fault could be found with the di






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top