Dismissed

Dr. Bal Mukund Shastri v. Gaur Brahman Vidya Parcharni Sabha & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Dec 2008RSA/349/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the appeal against dismissal of a suit for damages regarding the dismissal of an appellant from a private college. The bench held that personal service contracts cannot be enforced via specific performance and affirmed the lower courts' findings.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed, affirming the judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court.

Dr. Bal Mukund Shastri Vs Gaur Brahman Vidya… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

RSA No.349 of 2006

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

RSA No.349 of 2006 Date of Decision: 10.12.2008

¶5

Dr.Bal Mukund Shastri .....Appellant Vs.

¶6

Gaur Brahman Vidya Parcharni Sabha and another ....Respondents

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA

¶8

¶9

Present : Mr.N.K. Malhotra, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Ramesh Hooda, Advocate for the respondents.

¶10

RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)

¶11

Challenge in this appeal is to judgements and decrees dated 19.9.2002 and 29.8.2005, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Rohtak and Additional District Judge, Rohtak, dismissing the suit and the appeal filed by the appellant, respectively.

¶12

While working as the Principal of Gaur Brahman Ayurvedic College, Rohtak, the appellant was dismissed from service. Challenge to this order before the trial Court, as also the first appellate Court was dismissed on the ground that the respondent is a private society and, therefore, the only remedy available to the appellant is to file a suit for damages.

¶13

I have heard counsel for the parties and am of the considered opinion that the impugned judgements do not suffer from any error, whether

¶14

¶15

RSA No.349 of 2006

¶16

of fact or of law. It is a settled position in law that a contract of personal service cannot be enforced. The only remedy available to an aggrieved employee, in such a situation, is to file a suit for damages. As a result, the findings recorded by the Courts below are affirmed. The appeal is, therefore,dismissed.

¶17

Before parting with the judgement, it would be appropriate to mention here that under Haryana Affiliated Colleges (Security of Services) Act, 1979, the State of Haryana has constituted a Tribunal to consider and adjudicate service disputes relating to these colleges. The appellant may, if so advised approach the Tribunal under the aforementioned enactment for redressal of his grievance, in accordance with law.

¶18

(RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE

¶19

10.12.2008 GS

Dr. Bal Mukund Shastri v. Gaur Brahman Vidya Parcharni Sabha & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Bal Mukund Shastri v. Gaur Brahman Vidya Parcharni Sabha & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chanan Singh etc. Vs Surjit Singh

State of Punjab Vs Jasbir Singh

Anju Rani Vs Prem Chand

Bant Singh Vs Ishar Singh

Punjab State and Ors. Vs Vinod Guliani

Mohan Singh and Others Vs Amarjit Kaur and Others