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

2005 Supreme(SC) 684

S.B.SINHA, N.S.HEGDE, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
BABITA – Respondent


ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23-5-2002 in CWP No. 8120 of 2002 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the award made by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur whereby the Labour Court directed the reinstatement of the respondent with full back wages on the ground that the respondent had completed 240 days of continuous service in the given year. This finding of the Labour Court is based on material that was placed before it and also on the basis of the fact that the material which could have rebutted the claim of the respondent was not produced by the appellant even though the same was available with it. That being the case, in our opinion, the High Court was justified in dismissing the challenge to the award and confirming the same.

3. We find no error to interfere in this appeal. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.

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