Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Dayaram Mishra Vs. the South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Andors.

Dayaram Mishra vs The South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Andors.

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jan 03, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1045157

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dayaram Mishra

Advocate Shri. Rajneesh Gupta

Respondent

The South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Andors.

Advocate Shri. Vivek Rusia

Excerpt

dayaram mishra versus the south eastern coal fields ltd.& ors.writ petition no.6303 ”3. 1.2013: shri rajneesh gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri vivek rusia, learned counsel for respondents. challenging order annexure p-4 dated 24.7.2000 issued by the general manager (industrial relation) south eastern coal fields ltd.bilaspur declaring petitioner as 'persona not grata' and disallowing him to represent and discuss matter pertaining to workers in the unit headquarter and the company headquarter at bilaspur, this writ petition is filed in the year 2000. it is the case of petitioner that he is representative of the registered trade union namely the rashtriya koyla khadan mazdoor sangh, johilla area, which has been sponsoring and representing case of workers and also pointing out illegalities done by various officers of the company, in view of this with a malafide intention the impugned action was taken. respondents have filed the return and have brought on record various activities of the petitioner and it is pointed out that against him charge-sheet have been issued, petitioner has been punished and as the petitioner was using unparliamentary language and have tried to assault senior officers in the meeting of the union and the management, therefore, impugned action is taken. 2 having considered the rival contention and on perusal of record it is seen that the order was passed in the year 2000 and at that point of time petitioner was secretary of the union, not the position might changed after 13 years and if petitioner has any grievance still subsisting after all the period of time, liberty is granted to the petitioner to assail the action afresh in accordance to law, otherwise with the passage of time the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. with the aforesaid liberty the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (rajendra menon) judge ss/-

Full Judgment

Dayaram Mishra versus The South Eastern Coal Fields LTD.& ORS.Writ Petition No.6303 ”

3. 1.2013: Shri Rajneesh Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Vivek Rusia, learned counsel for respondents.

Challenging order Annexure P-4 dated 24.7.2000 issued by the General Manager (Industrial Relation) South Eastern Coal Fields LTD.Bilaspur declaring petitioner as 'Persona not Grata' and disallowing him to represent and discuss matter pertaining to workers in the Unit Headquarter and the Company Headquarter at Bilaspur, this writ petition is filed in the year 2000.

It is the case of petitioner that he is representative of the registered trade union namely the Rashtriya Koyla Khadan Mazdoor Sangh, Johilla Area, which has been sponsoring and representing case of workers and also pointing out illegalities done by various officers of the Company, in view of this with a malafide intention the impugned action was taken.

Respondents have filed the return and have brought on record various activities of the petitioner and it is pointed out that against him charge-sheet have been issued, petitioner has been punished and as the petitioner was using unparliamentary language and have tried to assault senior officers in the meeting of the union and the management, therefore, impugned action is taken.

2 Having considered the rival contention and on perusal of record it is seen that the order was passed in the year 2000 and at that point of time petitioner was Secretary of the Union, not the position might changed after 13 years and if petitioner has any grievance still subsisting after all the period of time, liberty is granted to the petitioner to assail the action afresh in accordance to law, otherwise with the passage of time the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

With the aforesaid liberty the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial