IN THE HIGH coum op’ % f 2
CIRCUIT BENCH i§?l;’VC}’_{JI;,)B}\R’£C}.1*1:..: ” X 7
DATED THIS TI-IE 7’1′? DA§”~(LA)1Ii’~AUGl,’I;’;-3’17. A
BETWEEN:-«V ”
Adm1’n1’stfatf$1*, V
UKPCADA, – % 2
Bhcemarayanégudi,».
T93 _____ _. 4
%tru1bamia Dist.%,
Yagnesi hwara Bhat,
s/0. Ram Bhat,
c,/o. V.G.
Voonvcnor,
“Daily Wages Worker’s Federation,
47/
Ra1’18a1I1P@’£»
Surpur Tq. ,
Gulbarga.
”
(By Sri. P.Vi1as Kumar, Adv,: for rt§sp'( fi1dent.. ;u} X 1
This Writ Appeal is filed, of tflé
High Court Act praying to “asidab a;*c!._e’1*.%passed in the
Writ Petition No.4-6702/2003 dt.’25–‘P’.-_-(Tr’?j; –.
This Writ Appeal ._ ‘V hearing’ this
day, K. SREEDHAR ,_ foH0Wir1g:-
Axmex1ms:s 4I3, C along with the appeal
disclose ” n<;tices were issued to the
mspfifidéatvifir absence and nmrlnanding
pver of purstxant to the ashow cause
did hot the needcri inquiry for rcmfi, on
gr misconduct Tm appenam imtm
4. .. . g ‘the servifi without inquiry and opportunity to
V The Labour Court has found thas; rwpondent
. in continuous service of more than 240 days. The
$/
had crystallized his service rights undg,-r t1§e%pmyis:ons;¢£%%:,f:.
Act since the removal is without orfier of
termination is bad in Law. It that
provisions of Scc.25F of the mse.
It is the case of is not one of the ma
In that f.ii1e.. order of the learrm
Single Judge Accordingly, the
appeal is dismisseisd. ”
Sd/-
JUDGE
$5′
3