REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

REGISTRAR HIGH COURT MADRAS Appellant

V/S

VASUDEVAN A K Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

BIMAN KUMAR ROY V. S. LAKSHMINARAYANAN [REFERRED TO]
C.RAMANATHAN V. ACTING ZONAL MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PARSHOTAM LAL DHINGRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. RAM NARAYAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
CHAMPAKLAL CHIMANLAL SHAH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. RAJINDRA SAREEN [REFERRED TO]
S P GUPTA V M TARKUNDE J L KALRA IQBAL M CHAGLA MISS LILY THOMAS A RAJAPPA UNION OF INDIA D N PANDEY R PRASAD SINHA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
KAMAL KISHORE LAKSHMAN VS. MANAGEMENT OF PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS INC [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDRA KUMAR MISRA VS. U P STATE HANDLOOM CORPN LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. KAUSHAL KISHORE SHUKLA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER V. V.N.PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
N K SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM N E TELECOM CIRCLE VS. RAJENDRACH BHATTACHARJEE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. S S KOURAV [REFERRED TO]
M KRISHNAMOORTHY VS. STATE OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
M KRISHNAMOORTHY VS. STATE OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF ENGINEER PERSONNEL TNEB MADRAS VS. K RAMAN [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Appeal No. 1132 of 1995 is against the order passed in W. P. No. 16243 of 1992, WRIT Appeal No. 1133 of 1995 is against the order passed in W. P. No. 16245 of 1992 and WRIT Appeal No. 1134 of 1995 is against the order passed in W. P. No. 16244 of 1992.

(2.) THESE writ appeals are filed by the Registrar of the high Court of Judicature, Madras , against an Order passed in the above writ petitions by a learned Judge of this court, dated 29. 11. 1994.

(3.) IT is stated that the petitioners have to face a punitive. transfer in the name of'administrative grounds'. IT is also said that the respondents have not applied their mind and have passed the order casually. They also say that the respondents ought to have considered the humanitarian issues arising out of the transfer order. According to them, the impugned order of transfer, being one passed in the middle of the Academic year, is violative of the Instructions issued by Government.

Click here to view full judgment.

REGISTRAR HIGH COURT MADRAS Vs. VASUDEVAN A K

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address