Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT JABALBUR BENCH
R.S. Jha, J.
Sandeep Tiwari - Appellant
Versus
M.P. Housing Board - Respondent
W.P. No. 2192-2014
Decided On : 01-08-2014
Regularization - Employment - The court directed the authorities to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law, citing the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umdevi and Others, (2006) 4 SCC 1.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regularization of employment and filed a representation, which had not been decided by the authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no merits in the petitioner's contention based on the law laid down by the Supreme Court, but directed the authorities to consider and decide the representation expeditiously.
Issues: Admission and interim relief for the petitioner's request for regularization of employment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umdevi and Others, (2006) 4 SCC 1, to make its decision.
Final Decision: The petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of with a direction for the authorities to consider and decide the representation expeditiously.
1.Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working with the respondents/authorities since 2003 and has filed a representation claiming regularization but the same has not been decided till date. He therefore, prays that the authorities be directed to do so.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merits in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umdevi and Others, (2006) 4 SCC 1. However, looking to the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the case, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a copy of the order passed today along with a copy of the petition, the authority concerned shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously, in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation by passing a reasoned order.
4. With the aforesaid directions, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
