Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PHOOL CHANDRA MISHRA versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' COOPERATIVE, U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Phool Chandra Mishra v. State Of U.P. Thru' Cooperative, U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 11590 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 4476 (24 February 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 7

          Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11585 Of 2006

                         Anand Kumar              Vs           State of U.P. and others

                                                                            ~~~~~

                                                                                                                     

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Cleaner/Pump Operator for a period of one year by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika (Pump Division), Fatehpur in 2005. Thereafter his services were terminated vide order dated 3.1.2006 passed by respondent no.3, hence this writ petition.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned termination order dated 3.1.2006 passed by respondent no.3.

A preliminary objection has been made by the Standing Counsel that the petitioner has approached this Court without exhausting the alternative remedy available to him before the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal as the matter requires findings of fact by adducing oral and documentary evidence which cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It will, therefore, not be feasible to decide this matter in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The counsel for the petitioner does not dispute this fact.

In Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. & another Vs Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. Employees Union, (2005) 6 S.C.C. 725 and U.P. State Spinning Co. Ltd. Vs. R.S. Pandey and another, (2005) 107 FLR 729, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that where specific remedy is provided, High Court should not entertain a writ petition and deviate from the general rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies under Article 226 except when a very strong case for bypassing of alternative remedy is made out.

The petitioner has alternative and efficacious remedy available before the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal in view of the aforesaid decisions and Full Bench decision rendered in Chandrama Singh Vs. Managing Director U.P. Co-operative Union, Lucknow and others, (1991) 1 U.P.L.B.E.C.(2) 898.

For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.

No order as to cost.

Dated 24.2.2006

CPP/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.