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

1993 Supreme(All) 67

V.N.KHARE, B.M.LAL, A.P.MISRA
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD – Appellant
Versus
AMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.C.BUDHWAR, Sapru Bharti, SUDHIR CHAND

V. N. KHARE, J.

( 1 ) THE main question which requires to be decided by this Full Bench in this Special Appeal arising out of judgment and order dated March 25, 1992 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court allowing the writ petition filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 32 against termination of their services as Routine Grade Assistants is as to "whether the administrative wing of the High Court not directly connected with the actual adjudication of the cases can be categorised as an industry within the meaning of Section 2 (k) of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. "

( 2 ) THE detailed facts of the case have been set-out in the judgment of the learned Single Judge and I need not repeat those facts to save the bulk. of this judgment However, I would briefly notice certain facts which led the respondents to file the writ petition under Article 226 of the constitution in this Court. On April 29, 1987 the then Honble the Chief Justice of High Court issued a direction to the effect that some Routine Grade Assistants may be appointed on ad hoc basis and appointments so made shall be purely contractual and will be terminable at any time without any notice. It was also directed that the 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