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

1995 Supreme(Del) 923

B.GOEL, P.K.BAHRI
B. G. SARASWAT – Appellant
Versus
ENGINEERS INDIA LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANAND PARKASH, D.G.SARSVAT, M.C.BHANDARE, M.N.SHROFF, SAURABH PRAKASH

J. B. Goel, J.

( 1 ) RULE D. B. Both the parties have filed their detailed pleadings and have also Filed some documents in support of their respective cases. A short point is involved and we have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we are finally deciding this writ petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Engineer with respondent No. 1 (Engineers India Limited) since 14th December, 1983 and subsequently he was also promoted as Senior Engineer with effect from 1. 7. 1989.

( 3 ) WHILE working with respondent No. 1, the petitioner was appointed on deputation basis for a period of two years by State Trading Corporation of India (For Short STC) as Manager Electrical with effect from 13. 6. 1989. While working with STC he did not attend his duty with effect from 2. 7. 1990 and on 3. 8. 1990 he was relieved by that office and repatriated to his parent department, i. e" respondent No. 1. He did not join duty even there and was posted by respondent No. l at their office at Gandhar. As he did not report for duty, vide letter dated 24. 9. 1990 he was required by respondent No. l to join duty by 15. 10. 1990 and he was also required to tender his explanation for h

























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