Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.N. Bhagwati, CJI., RANGANATH MISRA, J.
RANGA REDDY, OTHERS
Versus
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, OTHERS.
Civil Appeal No. 4111 of 1986, decided on November 5, 1986
Constitution of India,1950 - Implementation and remand - Application for interim relief - Court are of view Administrative Tribunal ought not to have determined the question of seniority without the appellants in both the appeals being before Tribunal since the determination of this question would directly affect the interest of the appellants. aside the order made by the Tribunal subsequent direction given by the High Court for its implementation and remand the matter to the Tribunal – Held, Tribunal as also subsequent direction given by the High Court for its implementation are being set aside by us, any consequential action taken by the State Government will also have to be set aside but it will be open to any party including the appellants to make an application for interim relief to Tribunal, y if so advised and if such application is made, it would will be for the Tribunal to dispose it of in such manner as it thinks fit - Appeals will stand disposed of
ORDER
1. Special leave granted.
2. We are of the view that the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal ought not to have determined the question of seniority without the appellants in both the appeals being before the Tribunal since the determination of this question would directly affect the interest of the appellants. We would, therefore, allow the appeals, set aside the order made by the Tribunal on September 3, 1984 and the subsequent direction given by the High Court for its implementation and remand the matter to the Tribunal with a direction that the appellants shall be joined as party respondents to the representation before the Tribunal and the representation shall be heard and disposed of by the Tribunal after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the parties including the appellants in both the appeals.
3. Since the order of the Tribunal as also the subsequent direction given by the High Court for its implementation are being set aside by us, any consequential action taken by the State Government will also have to be set aside but it will be open to any party including the appellants to make an application for interim relief to the Tribunal, y if so advised and if such application is made, it would will be for the Tribunal to dispose it of in such manner as it thinks fit.
4. Since the case is an old one we would request the Tribunal to dispose it of at a very early date.
5. The appeals will stand disposed of in these terms. There will be no order as to costs.
For Citation : 1987 (Supp) SCC 15.
Vikas Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
