Skip to main content

On selecting an option from the following Language drop-down list, the language of the content will change accordingly.

    Text Size:  Smaller text size Medium text size Larger text size  | 

    Contrast Scheme:  Standard View High Contrast View  | 

    Screen Reader
    SLIC, Socio-Legal Information Center.
    • Mail
    • Print
    • PDF

    Union of India v/s. S.N Maity , 2015 4 SCC 164

    Date : 06/01/2015

    The respondent was appointed on deputation to post of controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (C GPDTM) for 5 years or “until further orders” on 29.07.2003 after undergoing selection process and eventual recommendation by UPSC and was working as scientist EII in central mining research institute. However, he was repatriated to parent department after one year only.
    The court held that power under “until further orders” clause cannot be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously but must have some rationale and judgement passed by High Court setting aside premature repatriation order passed against the respondent was found justified by the court. It was further held that merely because words “until further orders” is used would not confer allowance on the employer to act with caprice. The court directed that since the period of appointment is over since last six years, the interest of justice would be served if the respondent 1 is paid entire salary payable to him for the post of CGPDTM for balance period with interest @ 9% p.a within three months.

    TP_2015_4_scc_164_176_debashishmohanta_hrlnorg_20170908_171450 (1)
    0

    Contact Us

    HUMAN RIGHTS LAW NETWORK

    Socio-Legal Information Center, 576, Masjid Road, Jungpura, New Delhi - 110014

    +91-11-24374501, +91-11-24379855, +91-11-24374502(Fax)

    contact@hrln.org

    Follow us on

    • facebook
    • google plus
    • twitter
    • linkedin
    • instagram
    • youtube
    Back To Top