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

2010 Supreme(Pat) 2296

AKHILESH CHANDRA
Jyotirmay Roy Son Of Late Karunamay Roy – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

Akhilesh Chandra, J.

1. Heard Sri S.N. Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Devi Kant Jha, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 3 and Sri Atul Chandra, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None appeared specifically on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking quashing of the order dated 26.5.2003 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Complaint Case No. 1152(M)/2003, taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. The relevant admitted fact is that there is an award dated 5th September, 2001 passed by Industrial Tribunal, Patna, in Reference Case No. 181/1999/6C/2001 published vide Notification dated 12.9.2001 and as per award, the Management of UCO Bank was directed to

(1) absorb Sri Shyam Kishore Pandey (opposite party no. 3 here) in the permanent post of sub-staff with. other empanelled casual workers with the restriction of fresh recruitment is lifted by Reserve Bank of India and when vacancy will available for such absorption;

(2) until the services of the workmen is

































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