Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.26 seconds)
Durgappa S/O Durgappa vs The Divisional Controller Nekrtc ... on 13 July, 2023 cites

Pandavapura Sahakara Sakkare ... vs The Presiding Officer, Additional I.T. on 25 February, 1992

NC: 2023:KHC-K:5402 WP No. 207355 of 2017 & Connected Matters KSRTC. The NEKRTC and NWKRTC having been formed out of KSRTC and the employees of KSRTC having been transferred to NEKRTC and NWKRTC and they having adopted the KSRTC (C & D) Regulations 1971, those Regulations being one and the same for KSRTC, NEKRTC and NWKRTC, the decision on Muniswamy's case would be equally applicable to NEKRTC and NWKRTC, and the declaration made therein would also apply to them. Thus, the main submission and the sub submission made in this regard are liable to be rejected. 20.5. Therefore, I answer Point No.1 by holding that despite the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Pandavapura's case, in view of a declaration made by a Division Bench of this Court in Muniswamy Gowda's case, it would be the KSRTC Servants (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1971, which will apply to
Karnataka High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Muniswamy Gowda H. vs Management Of Ksrtc And Another on 10 January, 1997

NC: 2023:KHC-K:5402 WP No. 207355 of 2017 & Connected Matters KSRTC. The NEKRTC and NWKRTC having been formed out of KSRTC and the employees of KSRTC having been transferred to NEKRTC and NWKRTC and they having adopted the KSRTC (C & D) Regulations 1971, those Regulations being one and the same for KSRTC, NEKRTC and NWKRTC, the decision on Muniswamy's case would be equally applicable to NEKRTC and NWKRTC, and the declaration made therein would also apply to them. Thus, the main submission and the sub submission made in this regard are liable to be rejected. 20.5. Therefore, I answer Point No.1 by holding that despite the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Pandavapura's case, in view of a declaration made by a Division Bench of this Court in Muniswamy Gowda's case, it would be the KSRTC Servants (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1971, which will apply to
Karnataka High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 4 - R P Sethi - Full Document

Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank ... vs Ram Gopal Sharma & Ors on 17 January, 2002

NC: 2023:KHC-K:5402 WP No. 207355 of 2017 & Connected Matters obtained from the Court seized of the industrial dispute. Apart from discharge or dismissal, if any other punishment is levied/imposed, then no such permission is required to be obtained. In the present batch of matters, it is not in all of them that the workman has been dismissed from service. The workmen have been dismissed from service only in WP No.200010/2014 and WP No.203006/2014. Thus, it is only in those cases that such permission was required to be obtained and compliance with the proviso to Clause-B of sub- section (2) of Section 33 of I.D.Act is required to be made. Thus, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd's case, the sanction not having been obtained, dismissal would be non-est and is required to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 1030 - S V Patil - Full Document
1   2 Next