Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ARAMAN FATMA & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Araman Fatma & Another v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 14309 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6233 (23 November 2005)

 

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

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J

         

        Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The petitioner was appointed as Clerk in the office of respondent no. 4. He claims that his appointment was made after following the prescribed procedures and it was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 21.3.1997.  He was regularly paid his salary till July 1997 but thereafter, no salary has been paid to him. When his representations remained unactioned, he filed Civil Misc. Writ No. 35115 of 1998 and an interim order to decide the representation of the petitioner was passed on 10.11.1998. Thereafter his services have been terminated by the impugned order dated 10.3.1999. The representation of the petitioner has also been rejected and hence this petition.

The petitioner has an effective, efficacious and alternative remedy before the Labour Court as has been held in Basant Lal Vs. U.P. State Roadways Transport Corporation and others (2003) 1 U.P.L.B.E.C. 154. It has been the consistent view of Hon'ble the Supreme Court that wherever an alternative remedy is available, it should not be bypassed and the petitioner has to approach this court after availing alternative remedy. Hon'ble the Supreme Court has recently held in Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd., and another Vs. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd., Employees Union-(2005)6 SCC-725 that wherever an alternate remedy is available it should not be bypassed and the petitioner has to approach this Court after availing alternate remedy.

          The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. In case the petitioner raises an industrial dispute within a period of one month from today, the concerned Labor Court will make all endeavour to decide the reference within a period of one year from the date of reference and if necessary, recourse may be taken to Rule 12(4) and (5) of the U.P. Industrial Rule. No order as to costs.

Dt. 23.11.2005

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.