Hafiz M.Abdul Samad vs Ameerunnisa Begum Saheba Endowment on 1 November, 2022
(i) Ram Piari vs. Municipal Committee, Pathankot and Ors.
reported in MANU/PH/0085/1956.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (1.42 seconds)Rameshwar Prasad And Ors. vs Municipal Board Pilibhit And Ors. on 17 March, 1958
"Now, Ram Piari was employed by the Municipal Committee to work and serve as a Headmistress in the Municipal Board Primary Girls' School at Pathankot. The relationship of master and servant thus came into existence between them. The resolutions of 1950 and 1951 under which Ram Piari agreed to serve the Municipal Committee do not contain any stipulation in regard to the period of her employment as Headmistress, nor are there any terms laid down in these resolutions on which she should be reverted if necessary.
S. Arjan Singh S. Mehar Singh vs State Of Punjab And Anr. on 20 May, 1960
In Smt. Ram Piari v. Municipal Committee, Pathankot, 1956-58 Pun LR 289: (AIR 1956 Punj 220), Bishan Narain J., has also ruled out the applicability of article 311 to a municipal employee. This contention on behalf of the petitioner thus fails and is repelled.
Charitable Trust vs State Of Haryana And Others on 26 November, 2013
In Ram Piari's case (supra), where a municipal employee had
been reduced in rank on account of his misconduct and rules of natural
justice had not been followed, it was held that contract to render personal
service cannot be specifically enforced holding that the theory is that the
contract of hiring personal service is of such a personal nature that there
cannot be any hope of ultimate and real success by the enforcement of it by
law Courts. Assuming that the employer was not justified in demoting the
employee, the remedy of the latter is to seek the damages for breach of
contract and not to enforce the contract by getting an injunction from the
Court.
1