Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM SABAD RAM versus GENERAL MANAGER AND ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Sabad Ram v. General Manager And Another - WRIT - A No. 2873 of 1996 [2004] RD-AH 123 (4 March 2004)

 

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. 23

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2873 of 1996

Ram Sabad Ram Vs. General Manager and others.

Hon'ble V.C.Misra,J.

Heard Sri S.K.Shukla, advocate, holding brief of Sri A.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arvind Kumar, advocate holding brief of Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that since an appeal has already been filed before respondent no.2, the District Magistrate, Ballia against the impugned order of termination, which is still pending for disposal may be disposed off on merit.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the writ petition is not maintainable in view of the settled law, in the case of Chandrama Singh Vs. The Managing Director, U.P.Co-operative Union Lucknow and others, reported in 1991 UPLBEC, 898, Rajastan State Road Transport, reported in AIR 1995 page 1715,    the Division Bench decision of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Pepsico India and Holding Ltd. Vs. The Dy.Labour Commissioner Kanpur and others,  reported in (2000) AWC, 1800   and  in the case of GM,KSCM Ltd. Sultanpur, U.P. Vs. Satrughan Nishad, reported in (2004) 1 UPLBEC 7, where it has been categorically held that the workman should have taken the recourse under the Industrial Dispute Act.

Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, respondent no.2 -the District Magistrate, Ballia is directed to dispose of the appeal of the petitioner pending before him with a speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of the production of a certified copy of this order before him.  However, it shall also be open to the petitioner to take recourse under the Labour Law/Industrial Dispute Act against the impugned order in accordance with law.  

With these directions the writ petition is dismissed.  No orders as to costs.

Pkc/Dated 4.3.2004


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.