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

2002 Supreme(All) 1943

P.K.CHATTERJI, JAGDISH BHALLA
RISHI KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ajit Kumar, B.Godiyal

JAGDISH BHALLA, J.

( 1 ) THE above mentioned first three writ petitions, namely, Writ Petition Nos. 954 (SB) of 2002, 956 (SB) of 2002 and 953 (SB) of 2002 are identical in nature, hence they were connected and heard altogether. Later on Writ Petition No. 1372 (SB) of 2002 was filed. Learned counsel for both the parties stated that this writ petition may also be connected with Writ Petition No. 954 (SB) of 2002 as the controversy involved in this writ petition is similar to that involved in Writ petition No. 954 (SB) of 2002. Accordingly, learned counsel for the respondents Sri Ajit Kumar made a statement that the counter-affidavit filed in earlier writ petitions be read as counter-affidavit to this writ petition, i. e. . Writ Petition No. 1372 (SB) of 2002 as well. Accordingly, the judgment was reserved also in fourth writ petition.

( 2 ) WRIT Petition Nos. 954 (SB) of 2002, 956 (SB) of 2002 and 953 (SB) of 2002 are directed against the order dated 19th July, 2002, challenging the impending termination of the petitioners which had come into force and according to the terms of the contract entered between the parties, petitioners terms of employment as Junior Manager (System) had c

























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