High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri C B Sathish vs The New Co Ordinator on 12 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri C B Sathish vs The New Co Ordinator on 12 March, 2008
Author: Subhash B.Adi
-V'I'i'-3-H!!! 't'I'I'.rI'I"I -fInUdI"ii"'H|'l'I I'41!".I I'.IA'P'§'I.'IjI'lI.l1']'l. filiffiijf I'\'I',I'lS

U1-£1,111' L11' hliflflfllflhh, 

DATED THIS THE mm DAY 01?  ,

BEFORE

THE 1~1u::J1mLE pm. ..1Us'I'L'::E   A

£.IJ"£:|l'!' nwrrrrnn; Mn 1 nfiai: finrifi    *

 5

C,LB..!_l,a°;'I1-131.1,

310 0.BaaA.PPA,
gmmwwwm, »»§
mommmmmmmmjy

autfl-Con-mflhA.nohA-RIOII

 _:':"a'"a"'.?F' 1 Ci 1

 $am
no .I'l'.i .|.'l.'.l.'.l.l.Jflallr.E

cm: 

flWn '=.'  "
3. THE 

; NEWBTUDEY 'PRIVfiTE LTD.
  brvfzsienj
   CHANNEL.

~ _ * ~ _ % em .,m_:";11.3nAvAn,
 &'.t5LE:IU'§IrLE&.I mm,
--A 
 :ta.e.;!!%L.rJ1=.E-1

l'I'|-"I"l"lA'l¥ 1-.-n-:1-ham.-Ham
1  LpU..EI'd"'uo'I"u-"I'.g

3:53

 ~ :  NEWBTODAY PRIVATE LTD.

"_{'T'EI..-FJVT$i'C)1i Dfvifiifiifi

 "AR.F.('3.,R.R. DISTRICT

.fi.NI3'HRA PRADESH
3. 'THE MANAGER,

WM! 'IZ':k'II'Tfl'A'!"'II'.I 93-13.

J" In II' III I-IFIJIJ II-'H GE fifiIOI%#l'

9; '.1', K.C.N.BHAWL1l,



V' _._#_ ._.L_.|._._.|.._.'l 'L.-- .L'I.. .......I-...
gwflfi "a':'v{}I1LTLa1 W LIE ITFJIEEI o

trnmnvunnn 1' unnn
It':-m.U.l.Ihl:I'u nunu,

mnnavnxmaan.

  

{BY Bm;n_..5HNARAMA anssncmrma.     * . %

Iflfl

__._ .14-'... .in_..._-':'..1'.._.V.'

mn_:_. ___.-.. ___.:.._'____ :_ 121.: V 
sun Wnt petumn 15 man; H T. :2,rI.n;1uu  

227 of the: Canstitution of Ir1diii*.pf.a}*ing1 "m 'iaoue'v Ewrit

in the. nature of  qamsh erdisr 
Qggegcvcva :11; mg zzg.94;2@::z?   

Court, Chilnnngalur Vida   'cor1;3aque11t1y
 ma EOE-'1'ri f'fi6(i"'E'3? fih6»pE:fi'I.nuur""'--'*~'i:'):tIo'""ffi t't'n3

labouw {tutu-t, C «'»-- pin: 'tr ~--:;tI.Ii£e_quua1fly allow the

TM pgtnifisn    hearing in
3 WP   «='5*"?'*'=*i=%v*~  foiinwins

 

 AAAA     
 L11  Ho,9'l!2ODT._l. in

-11- .1

canon    f316'ii'Iiififléi'.

'A    claims that he was: appoimnd an
 _  15.10.2000 and he was mmimmd from

9.5.2001

and he is entitled for reinstatement

baznthta. The said rauJew’ _net:ItIn’ ‘ n

_ A-.u….un

rm. .. …-……-…. .’l……A.
1 I10 IWFJIIR L

‘V aH:agodthat.haisnntawor1m|anandha’nonlya

strir1gaa’az1dthe1’eiunoappoir1tu1entorduarortarn1ua:l’

2 .41

.«5;>T’&:’

” , ;_sg__11*E~

— 4′ ’54’ – A –‘L-.-,-no -flu-nan-I-I.-n Aarauni-|.’l-‘

“m.u1=::ia or array’ auumy uuvutuvfi .w__§I-Lvvyu
Ra..2,UflD,r’- as a ramineruhip.
oomidering the inane as to whethacr the
workman, new that he in a A =

lulnlnflvir Hui.-Eh’ \rFJl«K’hIul.\’ rwuflw

Flag-I’ -I”!-mm mninn -n.m-ing_1 1_n_-rv__V1.-._n_;d_

233 am, that too, i.;s–. 5-am

data of appoinunenz It halrl
am he ma mt It also
that shown that

” ” t ;.; __,1 ….u be w::..+.u.=..-9-.—

‘ t ” of Rs.2,|DlJO!– ratnmerah1’ ‘p.
of service” and coxinltiusx-1r1g’ ‘ the

labour muurt bald that the

LL _’ : _¢_’;.’I…:I 1……….l2-A»

._ not unu. ‘mi ” auuuuu fisr I.IIu.unu.|..

tmtion 2.5 of the ID Ant.

3. It is mat in disputes that the petitioner clainn

that he was appointed on 18.10.2000 and he has

till 9.62001. The entim pmrind works out tn

flew.

t-v pf

233 ciays and it does frat i”ffi.’:fi”:,- 2% er” ;. a’v’e*-… a-.-..*-:fqrc”.i:’.g

tn :1».-.. petifioner also. Apart fium rm,

lerttor aha clcarly speaks that he in

strmgm-‘ _ fin’ a pmmu1u{ ‘ purw mggammip

patitinnar has mt ccjmpbtaad” nature
of a;1pnfiI1tment appaglfli no right flows