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

2003 Supreme(Del) 481

VIJENDER JAIN, VUENDER JAIN
VIJENDER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.N.Vohra, Vibhu Shankar

Vijender Jain

( 1 ) RULE. THE petitioner was appointed as conducted in the year 1984. On 14. 2. 1993, petitioner met with an accident causing loss of his right hand and was unable to perform the duties of a conductor. Petitioner was retired prematurely on medical grounds. It is the case of the petitioner that the retirement of the petitioner was in contravention of the circular dated 15. 10. 73 and 20. 1. 92 i. e. , without being asked for option for redesignation on a subordinate or alternative post.

( 2 ) MR. D. N. Vohra counsel for the petitioner has stated that in view of the judgment of Baljeet Singh Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation DLT 286 and other decision passed by this Court as well as Supreme Court , the respondent is under an obligation to provide alternative suitable job to the persons who have incurred disability during the course of employment.

( 3 ) MR. Vibhu Shankar counsel for the respondent has invited attention of the Court to the judgment of Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Shri Sadh Ram LPA 650/2002 decided on 19th September,2002 by Division Bench of this Court. Mr. Vohra has contended that the said judgment can be distinguished. Division Bench in Sadh Ram s case






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