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

2006 Supreme(P&H) 1648

M.M.KUMAR, M.M.S.BEDI
Rajinder Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. On account of common questions of facts and law and the view taken by the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi and Ors., we propose to decide these bunch of petitions, namely. C.W.P. Nos. 7563 of 2005, 7334 of 2005, 7569 of 2005, 728 of 2006, 1210 of 2006, 5651 of 2006, 5771 of 2006 and 5772 of 2006, by a common order. However, the facts arc mentioned mainly from two petitions i.e. C.W.P. Nos. 7563 of 2005 and 5771 of 2006. In C.W.P. No. 7563 of 2005, the petitioner has made prayer for quashing order dated 3.12.2004 (P-6) rejecting his demand justice notice on the ground that he was not in service prior to 31.1.1996 and he joined service as Tractor Driver on 1.5.1996.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Tractor Driver on daily wage basis on 1.5.1996. His services were terminated on 30.11.1997. He approached the Labour Court and vide award dated 18.5.2001 (P-I), the Labour Court set aside his termination. He was granted continuity of service with full back wages. Thereafter, the respondents filed C.W.P. No. 9713 of 2002 against the aforement



























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