AKIL KURESHI
A. PURSHOTTAM VADHER – Appellant
Versus
PHYSICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY – Respondent
( 1 ) IN this petition Rule was issued on 2-4-2004 and ad-interim relief staying the order relieving the petitioner from the post of assistant Administrative Officer was granted. Thus, the petition was placed before this Court for consideration of confirmation/vacation of interim relief. At the joint request of the learned Advocates appearing for both the sides, however, the petition was heard for final disposal from time to time. Accordingly, I have heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties at considerable length.
( 2 ) IN this petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents in not permitting him to withdraw his notice of voluntary retirement. In particular, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to quash and set aside the order dated 5-1-2004 passed by the respondents by which the notice of voluntary retirement given by the petitioner on 5-1-2004 was accepted.
( 3 ) SHORT facts leading to the present petition are that the petitioner, who is working as Assistant Administrative Officer with the respondent No. 1, i. e. , physical Research Laboratory, had sent a notice of voluntary retirement on 5-1-2004. The petitioner had by the
Vice Chairman and Managing Director, A.P.S.I.D.C. Ltd. v. R. Varaprasad.
Punjab National Bank v. Virender Kumar Goel.
Referred to : J. N. Srivastava v. Union of India.
Shambhu Murari Sinha v. Project and Development India.
Balbir Singh Negi v. Union of India.
Power Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Pramod Kumar Bhatia.
Nand Keshwar Prasad v. Indian Farmers Fertilizers Co operative Ltd.
Union of India v. Wing Commander T. Parthasarthy.
Bank of India v. O. P. Swarnakar.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.