– Photo : Social media
hear the news
The Supreme Court on Friday sought a sealed cover report in four weeks from the Registrar General of the Madras High Court, explaining the circumstances under which two separate orders were passed on September 1 by a division bench in the same civil case. were done. A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and BV Nagarathna took note of the submission of senior advocate K Subramaniam, appearing for one of the parties, that the order passed in the open court was different from the certified copy received by them.
The petition also alleged that two separate orders relating to a case having similar proceedings were posted on the website of the court at two different points. A very unusual situation has been brought to our notice by the counsel for the petitioner. The Division Bench of the High Court completed the hearing on August 29, 2022. On September 1, the bench pronounced its order in the open court. The bench perused the order pronounced by the Madras High Court, which was downloaded from the website of the High Court.
order to reinstate the person’s job
The Supreme Court on Friday ordered reinstatement of a man whose service was terminated nearly two decades ago in December 2002. Noting that the labor court had in August 2010 held the dismissal of JK Jadeja illegal and directed the Kutch district panchayat to reinstate him, the apex court observed that the management cannot be absolved of primary responsibility in its litigation. could.
A bench of Chief Justice U U Lalit and Justice S R Bhat set aside an order passed by a division bench of the Gujarat High Court which had set aside the direction to reinstate him and instead paid a compensation of Rs one lakh. The court found that the management had challenged the labor court’s decision, but a single judge of the High Court had directed reinstatement of the person in May 2011. Later the management filed an appeal which was dismissed in January 2014 following which it approached the apex court.