REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PANKAJ KUMAR Appellant

V/S

STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RAMLAL VS. REWA COALFIELDS LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
MANINDRA LAND AND BUILDING CORPORATION LTD VS. BHUTNATH BANERJEE [REFERRED TO]
ARJUN SINGH VS. MOHINDRA KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
LALA MATA DIN VS. A NARAYANAN [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDER SINGH VS. SANTA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY VS. R S NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
P K RAMACHANDRAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
MADANLAL VS. SHYAMLAL [REFERRED TO]
RAM NATH SAO ALIAS RAM NATH SAHU VS. GOBARDHAN SAO [REFERRED TO]
P RAMACHANDRA RAO VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
POPAT AND KOTECHA PROPERTY VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA STAFF ASSOCIATION [REFERRED TO]
PUNDLIK JALAM PATIL VS. EXE ENG JALGAON MEDIUM PROJECT [REFERRED TO]
PARIMAL VS. VEENA ALIAS BHARTI [REFERRED TO]
MANIBEN DEVRAJ SHAH VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF BRIHAN MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]
POSTMASTER GENERAL VS. LIVING MEDIA INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
BASAWARAJ VS. SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
ESHA BHATTACHARJEE VS. MANAGING COMMITTEE OF RAGHUNATHPUR NAFAR ACADEMY [REFERRED TO]
BRIJESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. BHERULAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. RANJEETA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant intra-court appeal, under clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dtd. 25/9/2019 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2076 of 2016 whereby and whereunder the writ petition has been allowed by quashing the impugned orders dtd. 11/2/2004, 22/9/2004 and 9/12/2005 passed by the disciplinary authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority respectively by which the petitioner was dismissed from service and the petitioner has been directed to be reinstated with 50% back wages.

(2.) The instant appeal is admittedly barred by limitation since there is delay of 348 days in preferring the appeal, therefore, an application being I.A. No. 5363 of 2020 has been filed for condoning such delay.

(3.) This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 348 days, deems it fit and proper, to first consider the delay condonation application before going into the legality and propriety of the impugned order on merit

Click here to view full judgment.

PANKAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address