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

2000 Supreme(SC) 1787

K.G.BALAKRISHNAN, M.JAGANNADHA RAO
HIRAN MAYEE BHATTACHARYYA – Appellant
Versus
S. M. SCHOOL FOR GIRLS – Respondent


( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned Senior Counsel for the respondents.

( 3 ) IT is true that the termination relates to a period before the decision in the case of Union of India v. Mohd. Ramzan Khan was rendered, but, at the same time sub-rule (8) of Rule 28 of the Management for Recognised non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided) Rules, 1969 requires principles of natural justice to be followed. Obviously the said principles of natural justice would include furnishing of the inquiry report.

( 4 ) WE, therefore, direct the disciplinary authority to furnish a copy of the enquiry report to the appellant and then permit her to submit her representation/explanation to the same and pass final orders thereafter. However, this will not lead to reinstatement or to back wages inasmuch as this Court has decided in the case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar that there need be no reinstatement nor back wages need be paid when the Court directs that the principles of natural justice should be followed. We, therefore, remit the matter to the disciplinary authority, being secretary, Shibarampur Madhyamik High School for Girls



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