Search results
By an order dated 5th August, 1991 in Managing Director, Electronic Corporation of India v. B. Karunakar (1992) 3 JT (SC) 605, a three Judge Bench of this Court referred that matter to the Chief Justice for being placed before a larger Bench, for the Bench found a conflict in the two decisions of this Court, viz., Kailash Chander Asthana v.
Jan 12, 1994 · Supreme Court of India. Managing Director Ecil vs B. Karunakar (Ii) on 12 January, 1994. Equivalent citations: 1994 SCC, SUPL. (2) 391, AIRONLINE 1994 SC 674. Author: B.P. Jeevan Reddy. Bench: B.P. Jeevan Reddy, B.L Hansaria. PETITIONER: MANAGING DIRECTOR ECIL Vs.
Mar 25, 2023 · The case of Managing Director ECIL v. B. Karunakar, heard by the Supreme Court of India in 1993, concerned the dismissal of an employee of Electronics Corporation of India Limited (ECIL). The case involved issues of natural justice, disciplinary proceedings, and the scope of the Public Servant (Inquiries) Act, 1850.
By an order dated 5th August, 1991 in Managing Director, Electronic Corporation of India v. B. Karunakar (1992) 3 JT (SC) 605, a three Judge Bench of this Court referred that matter to the Chief Justice for being placed before a larger Bench, for the Bench found a conflict in the two decisions of this Court, viz., Kailash Chander Asthana v.
CaseIQ. (AI Recommendations) Managing Director, E.C.I.L, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar (Ii) . Smart Summary (Beta) Facts: A complaint was made by a purchaser against the respondent, leading to an inquiry being conducted. Following the inquiry, the respondent was dismissed from service by the Corporation on 27-4-1987.
Jul 23, 2021 · The defendant was working with the organisation named ECIL where he was charged that he has passes an spurius T.V that too under the brand name of ‘Ajanta’ and this matter was reported by the defendant regarding using his brand name without permission and in result the job of the employee was on the threat that he might loose the job.
Oct 1, 1993 · In the case of Managing Director ECIL Hyderabad vs B. Karunakar, etc. etc., on 1 October 1993, the Supreme Court of India was confronted with a significant legal issue concerning the rights of employees during disciplinary proceedings.
1.This appeal is posted before us pursuant to the opinion rendered by the Constitution Bench in Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar1. In this case, the respondent was an Engineer working in the ECIL.
Versus. B. Karunakar (Ii) – Respondent. Decided On : 1994. Headnote: Read headnote. (1) THIS appeal is posted before us pursuant to the opinion rendered by the Constitution bench in Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar. In this case, the respondent was an Engineer working in the ECIL.
Oct 1, 1993 · Supreme Court. Download. MANAGING DIRECTOR ECIL HYDERABAD ETC. ETC. Vs B. KARUNAKAR ETC. ETC. Bench: M.N. VENKATACHALIAH CJI,P.B. SAWANT,K. RAMASWAMY,S. MOHAN,B.P. Case number: Appeal (civil) 3056 of 1991. Legal Authority allows lawyers and law students to do their research on thousands of legal documents on Indian laws and judgements.
