In this service matter, a single bench recorded a death certificate regarding a respondent and dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower appellate court's order reinstating the deceased respondent and declaring his dismissal unlawful.
The appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree of the learned Appellate Court were upheld.
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.
RSA No. 378 of 1988 1
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No. 378 of 1988
Date of Decision: 24 .01.2012
The Municipal Corporation Amritsar
……… Appellant
Versus
Natha Singh & another
………… Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. V.K. Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No.1.
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.
RSA No. 378 of 1988 2
found that the Enquiry Officer had fixed the date of enquiry as 27.5.1981 but had examined witnesses earlier on 21.5.1981. The respondent-Conductor had no notice of the date of recording of evidence. The learned lower appellate Court has found that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice in the conduct of the earlier proceedings. It also found that the worker was not given assistance of the co-employee in the face of the appointment of a Presenting Officer on behalf of the management. There appears nothing left to decide in this matter or any substantial question of law to be answered. The order of the learned Appellate Court does not appear to suffer from any legal infirmity and on the contrary it is well reasoned. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Appellate Court is upheld.
24.01.2012 (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) ‘sp’ JUDGE
The Municipal Corporation Amritsar
Natha Singh
Rajiv Narain Raina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
