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

2023 Supreme(Cal) 891

LAPITA BANERJI
Gopi Nath Pal – Appellant
Versus
Webel Electro-Optics Limited – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Gopi Nath Pal.
For the Respondent: Mr. Soumya Majumder, Mr. Ranajit Talukdar.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner was working as an accountant with Webel Electro-Optics Limited (WEOL). By a letter dated August 20, 1999, the Director-in-Charge, WEOL informed the Managing Director of M/s. Subir Udyog that the petitioner with another employee have been relieved from their duties at WEOL. The petitioner was relieved from WEOL in accordance with the Board’s resolution taken on March 30, 1999. The petitioner was instructed to report at M/s. Subir Udyog.

2. Upon receipt of the said letter dated August 20, 1999, wherein it has been informed that he has been relieved with effect from August 23, 1999, the petitioner requested the company WEOL to withdraw the said letter dated August 20, 1999. He requested WEOL to allow him to resume his duties. The petitioner also informed the Director-in-Charge of WEOL that he reported to Mr. Poddar of M/s. Subir Udyog Limited, but Mr. Poddar refused to absorb him in the said establishment.

3. The petitioner was informed that the Chairman, WEOL unlawfully sought to transfer the petitioner’s service. The said Mr. Poddar also requested the Chairman of WEOL to allow the petitioner to resume his duties at WEOL, upon withdrawal of the letter dated

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