<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1999 (8) TMI 990 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195366</link>
    <description>Where a lecturer sought leave for higher studies subject to an undertaking, failed to comply with the leave conditions, did not join the intended course, and did not resume duty, the Court held that the admitted record and replies to show-cause notices were sufficient, and a further formal enquiry under the Karnataka Private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Act, 1975 was not necessary as a ritual. The termination was therefore not vitiated by breach of natural justice. The Court also held that the order was founded on non-compliance with leave conditions and failure to return to duty, not on punitive imputation, so it was a termination simpliciter and not stigmatic. The appeal succeeded and the termination order was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:19:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (8) TMI 990 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195366</link>
      <description>Where a lecturer sought leave for higher studies subject to an undertaking, failed to comply with the leave conditions, did not join the intended course, and did not resume duty, the Court held that the admitted record and replies to show-cause notices were sufficient, and a further formal enquiry under the Karnataka Private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Act, 1975 was not necessary as a ritual. The termination was therefore not vitiated by breach of natural justice. The Court also held that the order was founded on non-compliance with leave conditions and failure to return to duty, not on punitive imputation, so it was a termination simpliciter and not stigmatic. The appeal succeeded and the termination order was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>