https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176086 Article explains that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and ordinarily should not be used when an efficacious statutory remedy exists under the industrial dispute machinery. It notes recognised exceptions for breach of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or abuse of process, but states that even where termination is vitiated, the court may preserve the employer's disciplinary rights by directing reinstatement only for the limited purpose of completing the enquiry from the stage of the defect, without back wages or other service benefits. en-us Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Dec 2015 19:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176086 Article explains that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and ordinarily should not be used when an efficacious statutory remedy exists under the industrial dispute machinery. It notes recognised exceptions for breach of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or abuse of process, but states that even where termination is vitiated, the court may preserve the employer's disciplinary rights by directing reinstatement only for the limited purpose of completing the enquiry from the stage of the defect, without back wages or other service benefits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176086