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

2003 Supreme(All) 932

ANJANI KUMAR
U. P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD – Appellant
Versus
PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Arvind Kumar, B.DAYAL, B.P.SINGH, K.P.AGARWAL, SUDHIR AGRAWAL

ANJANI KUMAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition was heard by this Court and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, it was dismissed on 28th April, 2003, for the reasons to be recorded later on. Now here are the reasons for dismissing the aforesaid petition.

( 2 ) BY means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners--employers U. P. State Electricity Board (now U. P. Power Corporation Limited)have challenged the impugned award dated 3rd September, 1990, passed by the Industrial tribunal-I, U. P. Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the tribunal) in Adjudication Case No. 168 of 1980, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

( 3 ) FROM the narration of fact, it appears that the respondent workman Mohd. Jamil was employed in September, 1977 as a muster roll employee on daily wages. The services of the workmen were terminated in the year 1979, therefore, an industrial dispute was raised in which two questions were required to be answered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal after going through the pleadings and the evidence adduced by the parties while deciding the point No. 1 have found that the termination of services of conc








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