Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1362; [2003(97)FLR328]; RLW2003(3)SC340; 2003(3)SCALE193; (2003)4SCC59; [2003]2SCR615; 2003(3)SLJ248(SC)
ORDER1. The appellant was compulsorily retired from service by the order dated 11.4.1994. He assailed the said order of his compulsory retirement by filing a writ petition. The learned Single Judge rejecting the contentions urged on behalf of the appellant upheld the same. The appellant pursued the matter further by filing a writ appeal before a Division Bench or the same High Court. The Division Bench of the High Court after considering the rival contentions urged on behalf of the parties and keeping in view the principles stated in the case of Baikunth Nath Das and Anr. v. Chief District Medical Officer, Baripada and Anr. : (1992)ILLJ784SC , dismissed the writ appeal affirming the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence the appellant is before us in this appeal questioning the validity and correctness of the impugned order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court.2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that although the two contentions, namely, the order of compu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1831; JT2003(2)SC431; 2003(2)SCALE542; (2003)5SCC321; (2003)2UPLBEC1109
Ruma Pal, J.1. Leave granted.2. The first appellant is an Institute incorporated under a statute entitled the Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh Act, 1966 (referred to as the '1966 Act'). The object for setting up the Institute is reflected in the name. The Institute has, broadly speaking, three Departments, namely, Education, Hospital and Engineering Departments. We are concerned with the Engineering Department. The Engineering Department deals primarily with maintenance works of the Institute and includes diverse activities from maintenance of mechanical equipment such as operation tables to collection and distribution of linen. According to the appellants, there are distinct sections dealing with the different kinds of activities, each section having its separate administrative hierarchy. The question to be decided in this appeal is whether in 1980 promotions within the Engineering Department were to be made section wise or cadre wise.3. Section 31...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1871; 2003(2)SCALE533; (2003)9SCC580
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. Leave is granted.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. Dissatisfied with the order of the Division Bench of the High Court of (Judicature) Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No. 7(SIC) of 2000 dated December 2, 2000, the Vice-Chairman, Hyderabad Urban, Development Authority is in appeal before this Court.4. The respondent filed Writ Petition No. 4187 of 2000 seeking a writ of mandamus to declare Letter No. 2967/P4/H/99 dated February 18, 2000 issued by the appellant was illegal and arbitrary, to quash the same and for a consequential direction to the appellant to release the plan without insisting on the production of the Urban Land Ceiling Clearance Certificate from the Special Officer, Urban Land Ceiling. A learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the Writ Petition following the judgment of the same High Court in Writ Petition No. 23100 of 1999 passed on November 19, 1999. A perusal of the said judgment discloses that it was rendere...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1872; 2003(3)AWC1788(SC); 2003(51)BLJR929; [2003(97)FLR110]; JT2003(2)SC386; (2003)IILLJ159SC; 2003(4)MhLj214; 2003MPLJ1(SC); RLW2003(2)SC262; 2003(2)SCALE536; (20
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. Leave granted in SLP(C) No. 9735-9738/2000.2. validity of retrenchment of project/scheme employees as also the precise procedure to be followed so as to amount to retrenchment as per law, are the issues arising for decision in these appeals. 3. A brief resume of uncontroverted and such other facts as cannot at this stage be disputed. In the State of Bihar a large number of workers were engaged on daily wage basis, instead of making regular appointments, in the Government departments by the authorities. The practice was viewed with concern by the State Government and it was decided to discourage the same. However, the authorities continued with making such illegal appointments contrary to the directions issued by the State Government. A stage reached when the State Government had to take a decision of terminating all appointments made on daily wage basis or on muster roll. The employment of a good number of such employees whose employment on daily wage basis or on must...
Tag this Judgment!