SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA
Babu Ram Sagar – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer – Respondent
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. (Oral)
1. This appeal under the Letters Patent has been filed by the workman, – Shri Babu Ram Sagar, impugning the decision of a Single Judge of this Court whereby that Court has declined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and to interfere with the order of the labour court in I.D. No. 328 of 1992 decided on 29th August, 1995. By that order, the learned labour court had concluded that even though the Management had failed to prove the allegations against Shri Babu Ram Sagar, nevertheless, it was clear that the Management had lost confidence in him. Under the circumstances, the labour court felt that since Shri Babu Ram Sagar was employed as a chowkidar of the office, it would not be conducive to the proper functioning of the Management to direct his reinstatement. Another reason for declining the request to direct reinstatement was that more than three years had elapsed since the termination of the appellant’s services. Upto the time his services were terminated the appellant had admittedly put in a little less than four years of his service. At that time, his salary was Rs. 762/- plus other allowances. In other
Allahabad Jal Sansthan v. Daya Shankar Rai and Anr.. (2005) 5 SCC 124
Chief Conservator of Forests v. Rahmat Ullah.
Hlndustan Motors Ltd. v. Tapan Kumar Bhattacharya
K.H. Pandhi v. The Presiding Officer
M.L. Binjolkar v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2005) 6 SCC 224
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.