Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1993 (11) TMI 251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ational qualification of the candidates should not be more than the 8th Standard. Respondent produced a certificate issued by the School authorities to the effect that he had passed the 7th Standard on 15.5. 1974. The purpose of this was to show that his qualifications were not more than the 8th Standard. He, accordingly, succeeded in having himself empanelled as a 'badli' workman. On receiving certain complaints that the respondent had secured employment by suppression of truth and by false representation, the appellant issued a show-cause notice to the respondent asking as to why action should not be taken against him under the standing orders. In reply the respondent admitted that he had completed 10th Standard and pleaded for sy....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....jected. The petitioner as also the workers are bound by the terms of Ext. PI which had to be given effect to. Over qualification is certainly, in the circumstances, a disqualification, which aspect the first respondent failed to grasp. Ext. P10 in these cases is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside. 5. But, the learned Single Judge said that there would be no hardship or prejudice caused to the appellant if the respondent was' reinstated. The learned Single Judge said:     ... As a special case and not by way of a precedent, the petitioner shall not implement the dismissal order and let the two workers continue in employment as directed. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition came to be dismissed. The appellant ....