T.T.Joseph, v. Union of India
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition titled 'A' Charles v Union of India' by applying a 2018 precedent, order dated 28.03.2018, passed in WP.No.17513 of 2011, with the matter remanded to the 4th respondent with directions for continued employment.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.10969 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
Writ Petition No.10969 of 2018 and Writ Miscellaneous Petition No.12878 of 2018
T.T.Joseph .. Petitioner
/versus/
1.Union of India, rep.by its Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviations, Government of India, New Delhi. 2.The Executive Director, Air India Ltd., National Aviation Company of India Ltd., NAC II (1), Airline House, Meenambakkam, Chennai 600 027. 3.The General Manager-Personnel, Air India Ltd., National Aviation Company of India Ltd., Airline House, Meenambakkam, Chennai-600 027.
Page No: 1/10
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be absorbed permanently by Air India Ltd. or have his employment protected.
Whether the Writ Petitioner standing disposed of a 2010 precedent applies to the facts of the current case.
Whether the petitioner's casual employment should be regularized or protected against unfair displacement.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
T.T. Joseph
- respondent
Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation
- respondent
The Executive Director, Air India Ltd.
- respondent
The General Manager-Personnel, Air India Ltd.
- respondent
The Deputy General Manager-Personal, Air India Ltd.
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court