Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Shambhu Lal – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against verbal termination of employment. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 2. petitioners argue for reinstatement and specific conditions. (Para 3) |
| 3. tribunal's jurisdiction and contract nature of employment. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. supreme court's ruling on temporary employment rights. (Para 7) |
| 5. legality of managerial termination upheld. (Para 8) |
| 6. writ petition dismissed as without merit. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kumar Upman, J.
1. Heard.
2. Challenge in this writ petition is against the judgment dated 12.07.2022 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') vide which, Original Applications ('OAs') filed by the petitioners assailing their verbal termination orders dated 30.06.1992/01.07.1992 were dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error of facts and law in rejecting the claim of the petitioners. He further submits that the action of the respondent employer was malafide as the advertisement dated 23.03.1991 was issued for recruitment on different posts for short term on sanctioned posts and it cannot be considered as contractual employment. He further submits that
Point of Law : Re-engagement of the petitioners after the first contractual period was over will not amount to unfair practice.
The court upheld the tribunal's ruling that the temporary termination did not constitute retrenchment under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the definition of 'workman' under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the principles related to termination of contractual employees and the....
Temporary employees have no right to continue in service, and the civil court lacks jurisdiction to entertain claims based on the Industrial Disputes Act.
If misconduct is the foundation to pass the order, then an enquiry into misconduct should be conducted and an action according to law should follow. But if it is (sic) notice, it is not incumbent upo....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
