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

1994 Supreme(AP) 538

S.R.NAYAK
T. Jayasena Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Regional Manager, APSRTC – Respondent


S. R. NAYAK, J.

( 1 ) A short question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether this Court in exercise of its power under article 226 of the Consittution of India could prohibit the respondents-Corporation from enforcing a contractual obligation against the petitioner. This question has arisen in the backdrop of the following facts.

( 2 ) THE petitioner joined the services of the respondents-Corporation as Traffic Inspector grade-II on 22-6-1987. Thereafter- wards, the petitioner along with the other recruitees for the said post, underwent training for a period of eighteen months. As per the terms of the employment, the petitioner and other similarly circumstanced had to execute an agreement in favour of the respondents-Corporation undertaking to serve the Corportion for a period of atlcast five years on completion of the training and if for any reason they cannot serve for a period of five years, to refund sum of money received by them towards stipend during training. Accordingly, the petitioner had executed such an agreement in favour of the respondents-Corporation on 11-5-1987. When (he petitioner was working as Traffic Inspector grade-II in die services of






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