Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri M N Balakrishna S/O M S Nagaraj vs The Executive Director on 14 August, 2018

Author: Ravi Malimath

Bench: Ravi Malimath

                           1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

            ON THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2018

                        BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

         WRIT PETITION NO.11332 OF 2010 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI M.N.BALAKRISHNA
AGE 60 YEARS,
SON OF M.S.NAGARAJ,
MECON LIMITED,
A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE,
RANCHI, JHARKHAND STATE,
RESIDENT OF NO.420/14, 'PARIJATHA',
6TH 'A' CROSS, AMARJYOTHI NAGAR,
VIJAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 040.                         ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI K.L.ASHOK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
       MECON LIMITED,
       A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE,
       NO.89, SOUTH END ROAD,
       BASAVANAGUDI,
       BENGALURU - 560 004.

2.     THE CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR,
       MECON LIMITED,
       A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE,
       RANCHI,
       JHARKHAND STATE.
                                2



3.    THE MANAGER (PERSONNEL),
      MECON LIMITED,
      A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE,
      RANCHI,
      JHARKHAND STATE.                 ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.C.PRABHAKAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH BY ISSUE
OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
23.03.2007 VIDE ANNEXURE-N PASSED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT, AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, UNSUSTAINABLE
AND ALSO OPPOSED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL
JUSTICE AND ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                          ORDER

After arguing the matter for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents be directed to consider the request of the petitioner for voluntary retirement.

2. The respondents' counsel submits that the said request will be considered in accordance with law.

3. Under these circumstances, petition is disposed off. Respondents are directed to consider the request of the 3 petitioner vide Annexure-H dated 16.10.2006 and Annexure-L dated 12.03.2007 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

SD/-

JUDGE ST