![8/15, 09:04] Adhilashmi Logomoorthy: Legal Eagles Elites presents Independence Day Special Topic: Law as Proponent of Woman Rights Faculty: Shangar Murali, Advocate, High Court Madras](https://sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Follow:
- Next story Police castigated for booking ‘whistleblowers’ Chennai, July 26 (PTI): The Madras High Court has unleashed a scathing attack on the investigating agency, in this case the police in Coimbatore city, for registering various cases and FIRs against a person, said to be a journalist and arresting him, even under the Goondas Act.
- Previous story Full orderTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.No.30074 of 2019—–Finding that the Authority concerned has deeply gone into all the factual and legal aspects and conferred permanent status on the Workmen, which, in the considered opinion of this Court, is perfectly valid and justified and does not warrant any interference by this Court. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition filed by the Management is dismissed, on the ground of bereft of essence and substance and devoid of merits. It is true that no time limit is prescribed under the 1981 Act for seeking permanency, but at the same time, the employees must have approached the Authority concerned at least within a reasonable time frame. In the present case on hand, the employees have slept over for quite a long time and knocked at the doors of the Authority only in the year 2009. Once the order of the Authority is confirmed, all the benefits accrued to the employees should be extended to the employees from the date of permanency. However, taking into account the present pandemic situation and considering the fact that there is a delay in approaching the Authority, this Court, invoking the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, deprives backwages till today. However, it is made clear that on and from the date of completion of 480 days in a period of 24 calendar months, the employees are entitled to continuity of service, with all other notional and consequential benefits, that are available to their counter parts and the same shall be extended to them within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 24.06.2021 Index: Yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order ar Note: Issue order copy and upload in the Web on 26.07.2021
Recent Posts
- In view of our decision holding the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Amendment Act 33 of 2010 as repugnant, void andultra vires the Constitution, the proceedings initiatedagainst the appellants by issuance of show cause notices in exercise of the power of such enactment are unsustainable and, as such, the common order ofthe learned Single Judge dated 3.7.2023 in W.P.Nos.17331, 13507, 13510, 13514, 14424,14426, 14428, 14432, 16963, 17164, 17399,17371, 18475 and 18479 of 2023 is set aside.(ii) The respective show cause notices/orders issued against the appellants shall stand quashed. However, the respondent authorities will be at liberty to initiatefresh proceedings under the Waqf Act, 1995, as amended, in accordance with law.(iii) There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, all connected miscellaneous petitionsare closed.(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)23.04.2024
- Today MBA evening NAVJ / on “A Judge Criticizing his own Judgment in thematter of Suit for Land”/
- [25/04, 11:08] sekarreporter1: ,[25/04, 11:03] sekarreporter1: https://youtu.be/EqQEISHw-MQ?si=Vx_4sGsqVTaEXeBj[25/04, 11:03] sekarreporter1: [25/04, 10:55] sekarreporter1: Senior Advocate Srinath Sridevan recalled an interesting anecdote about former A-G R Krishnamoorthy, a doyen of Madras Bar
- R Y George Williams requested the first bench CISF extent to entire high court as well as entire judiciary in Tamilnau and further argued that baricaurd between the city court and High court May be removed and it maye be covered to entire campus to avoid multiple bresking to enter the high court premises. CJ informed that direction issued to everywhere. and further RY George Williams argued that high court for got the security of the lower judiciary
- Today 5 law tips/ Vinothpandian: 2019 (4) SCC ( cri ) 469 : kamil vs state of Uttar pradesh : sentence or order passed by trial court in absence of charge or any error , omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder cannot be held invalid by court of appeal confirmation or revision, unless the accused is prejudiced and failure of justice has been occasioned thereby (. Sec 464 CRPC )
More
Recent Posts
- In view of our decision holding the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Amendment Act 33 of 2010 as repugnant, void andultra vires the Constitution, the proceedings initiatedagainst the appellants by issuance of show cause notices in exercise of the power of such enactment are unsustainable and, as such, the common order ofthe learned Single Judge dated 3.7.2023 in W.P.Nos.17331, 13507, 13510, 13514, 14424,14426, 14428, 14432, 16963, 17164, 17399,17371, 18475 and 18479 of 2023 is set aside.(ii) The respective show cause notices/orders issued against the appellants shall stand quashed. However, the respondent authorities will be at liberty to initiatefresh proceedings under the Waqf Act, 1995, as amended, in accordance with law.(iii) There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, all connected miscellaneous petitionsare closed.(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)23.04.2024
- Today MBA evening NAVJ / on “A Judge Criticizing his own Judgment in thematter of Suit for Land”/
- [25/04, 11:08] sekarreporter1: ,[25/04, 11:03] sekarreporter1: https://youtu.be/EqQEISHw-MQ?si=Vx_4sGsqVTaEXeBj[25/04, 11:03] sekarreporter1: [25/04, 10:55] sekarreporter1: Senior Advocate Srinath Sridevan recalled an interesting anecdote about former A-G R Krishnamoorthy, a doyen of Madras Bar
- R Y George Williams requested the first bench CISF extent to entire high court as well as entire judiciary in Tamilnau and further argued that baricaurd between the city court and High court May be removed and it maye be covered to entire campus to avoid multiple bresking to enter the high court premises. CJ informed that direction issued to everywhere. and further RY George Williams argued that high court for got the security of the lower judiciary
- Today 5 law tips/ Vinothpandian: 2019 (4) SCC ( cri ) 469 : kamil vs state of Uttar pradesh : sentence or order passed by trial court in absence of charge or any error , omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder cannot be held invalid by court of appeal confirmation or revision, unless the accused is prejudiced and failure of justice has been occasioned thereby (. Sec 464 CRPC )