Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
I have burnt my fingers twice in high court single & double bench by dismissing the writ petitions,
before joining the transfer location.
After joining the transfer location without any opinions,hoping for good treatment, now after 2 yrs of ill treatment by PSU..I need to decide for review petition at HC or SLP at SC.
Hence, I was trying to understand case grounds & strength by various seniors/experts to proceed leagly or
Not(As psu bare leagal expense by Public money,but I need to bare by savings for many years, after that I want to sure)
Regards

Dear anonymous,
If you have lost at both single and double benches level at HC,then you have to approach Supreme Court.
There must be some fundamental weakness in your side which needs to be analysed and addressed,if you want relief from courts.
Legal battles are always expensive for any individual but organisations can afford to pay.
Think twice before venturing into legal battles
Try and settle things in office itself.
Court should be lasts resort.

1. Sir, I think, there is some time-limitation within which one can file appeal or review petition in High Court or in Supreme Court.

2. As a general rule, the Hon'ble courts do not intervene in transfer cases citing the reasons that it is within the powers of the executive and courts cannot interfere into the powers of the executive. Even in those cases where there is any transfer policy in any department, hon'ble courts refuses to intervene by citing the reasons that such transfer policies are not statutory and are merely departmental instructions and are discretionary.

3. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no utility of making a prestige issue with the Authority and rather, it is more advisable to follow the instructions, comply with the grievance procedure and if in any case it is felt that a transfer is vindictive and with a malafide intention, an employee may firstly exhaust the departmental channels and thereafter approach the Tribunal or High Court etc. having proper jurisdiction in such matters as per service rules as applicable.

Dear sir..

HRD is transferred to marketing department without change in pay scale.

HC is dismissed writ as per appointment Clauses the screen shot is attached.

Where as reporting officer has used the clause no 12 & assign of Manager responsibilities at Guwathi, where no company establishment & on email attendance salaries paid.

Later after one year medical representative responsibilities given,where daily reports are sent by post & mail..but salary reduction was done without giving reasons.

Question is what responsibilities given are in line with

Natural justice or malafide as purpose of appointment is deafeated of an engineer.

If I was given AGM grade salary & infrastructure /manpower then clause no 12 is applied.

Is the clause is leagaly confirm,as any designation/function means they assign attender job.

Is HC has made error..?

As per my knowledge with in 3 years SLP can filed

In SC, I have good one in hand.

Regarding review petition do not know the time limit

I have clean record for the last 8 yrs.

Company has settled my account without domestic enquiry,as I was scared the threats form reporting officer,hence i did not report duty for 9 months, but F&F is done in last month on the basis of long absence (I have communication mail with valid reasons for being absent with proof of documents)

As various PSU service conditions/CDA rules/standing orders, the punishment after enquiry is limited to demotion or increment cut definitely no suspention/no dismisa of service..?

As per clause no 15 the company can transfer on same role or same conncted experience,other wise in my view the HC judge may transfed as equal rank of police commissioner since both know the law & orders..?

Sir..Let us assume that what company has done right as per CDA rules & they might have taken board approvals

May be I was due for promotion & there may not be available post in company, it doesn't mean that company can misuse the technical manpower on mear Clauses of appointment letter(in my view appointment letter is understanding of both not leagal BOND)

Dear seniors thanks for your time, expecting clarification on merit of case please.

Kindly ignore the mobile typing errors.

Regards.

Please find attached screen shot for above reply.

Attached Images
Membership is required for download. Create An Account First
File Type: png Screenshot_2016-02-14-00-01-34_com.google.android.apps.docs.png (276.9 KB, 19 views)

Dear Anonymous,
To be short, I may say, the terms & conditions, as accepted by the candidate at the time of offer of appointment are sacrosanct and cannot be considered to have been waived off automatically. So, the judgment of HC cannot be termed as wrong, as per lause 12 of the terms of appointment.
Secondly, approval of Bboard is not required in transfer cases. Transfers can be made by the competent authority delegated with the powers by the Board or the MD.
However, you were free not to accept clauses 12 & 15 of appointment before acceptance or could have referred the matter subsequently to the MD or Board for relaxation of the said terms.

Sir..As per clause no 12 is standard clause Normly used in the interest of company But any functional responsibility/Any designation mean Psu can ask to work one as attender post & salary.
Dear work at home. Please find attached screen shot of HC single bench was positive on employee & adviced company to fallow the order but due to good hold they rejected. Regards & tnx for ur time.

Attached Images
Membership is required for download. Create An Account First
File Type: png Screenshot_2016-02-14-17-16-08_com.google.android.apps.docs.png (268.6 KB, 10 views)

Hi Anonymouse,
There seems to be some misinterpretation of the judgment on your part. The judgment seems to have become hazy for you due to two different statements appearing in the judgment. The judge has very clearly stated, "I find no legal predicament to grant the prayer. As per judgment that clearly means that the judge has not found any injustice in application of the conditions of your appointment in your case to admit your prayer. In the order, the judge has simply asked respondent No. 4 to "consider" your representation, dated 19.10.2013. But he has not given any clear direction for the said respondent to consider that positively or negatively. The judgment left the matter totally at the discretion of respondent No 4, to give positive or negative decision on consideration of your representation.

Dear friend,

The Hon' HC did not grant relief nullifying the transfer itself (ref.screen shot). If you read the judgment/order it simply states the representation of the petitioner should be 'considered' expeditiously within the time mentioned in the order. Therefore you cannot claim there is a relief granted by the HC. The Co. still might say..."the representation of the petitioner has been considered sympathetically in the light of HC directives and found no merit in the grounds raised by the petitione and as per the terms & conditions of the apptt. the petitioner should have reported to the place of posting/transfer. Since he has not reported he was reported as 'deserter/absentee' and as per rules of the Co. he was terminated following necessary procedure'..... or in some other words meaning same action. The CDA (Conduct,Discipline & Appeals Rules ?) has to be read together with your Terms & conditions of offer/apptt. which you have accepted. I don't think this can be changed now. It's also very much delayed I don't know what relief you are entitled to legally. Better you can consult some eminent advocate with available documents to know what is possible at this juncture.


This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.






About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™