Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

E.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR versus THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


E.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR v. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE - WP(C) No. 36620 of 2004(H) [2007] RD-KL 12961 (13 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 36620 of 2004(H)

1. E.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE
... Respondent

2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,

3. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.VIJAYAN

For Respondent :SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSRTC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

Dated :13/07/2007

O R D E R

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

W.P(C).No.36620 OF 2004

Dated this the 13th day of July, 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioner, then a conductor in the K.S.R.T.C., submitted his resignation on 11.6.1995. He has filed this writ petition in 2004 pointing out that on 16.9.1999, he filed a requisition to permit him to re-join duty as conductor. The plea made by him is that he had submitted his resignation on 11.6.1995 because he was ill and the respondents were refusing to grant leave. He was also under the threat of disciplinary proceedings for absence. According to him, he has been completely cured off his ailments and it was therefore, that he applied on 16.9.1999 to re-join duty.

2. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit on 28.2.2005 specifically asserting that the petitioner submitted a resignation which was not in proper form and that following the rejection of that resignation, he later submitted a resignation in proper form on 7.7.1995, which was made voluntarily and with a request that WPC.36620/04 Page numbers his resignation may be made effective from 7.7.1995. That application was considered by the Corporation and effected his resignation and the resultant vacancy has been filled up subsequently. In view of the aforesaid uncontroverted statement of the respondents, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The writ petition fails. The same is dismissed accordingly. No costs. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.


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.