Service grievance

While exercising jurisdiction under Art. 184(3) of the Constitution the Supreme Court was bound by the conditions of the said Article, and moreover by such rules which were laid by the Supreme Court for regulating its jurisdiction, keeping in view the principles of restraints

In cases of contractual service, where the grievance agitated was against a private person, there was no reason that such restraint should not be resorted to by the Supreme Court.

Cases where the employment/service(s) was not regulated by any law, but by non-statutory rules or contractual stipulations, and no specific forum was designated for the resolution of such service issues, an infringement of any condition of such a contract shall at the most entitle and clothe the employee to avail his ordinary remedy for the breach of contract and wrongful action against him, before the court of plenary jurisdiction

In such a situation, it could not be urged that the fundamental right(s) of the employee had been violated conferring upon him a right to enforce the same in terms of Art.199 and/or under Art.184(3) of the Constitution.

Where a service grievance was agitated by a person/employee who was not governed by statutory rules of service, before the High Court, in terms of Art.199 of the Constitution, such petition shall not be maintainable.

Cases where the employment/service(s) was not regulated by any law, but by non-statutory rules or contractual stipulations, and no specific forum was designated for the resolution of such service issues, an infringement of any condition of such a contract shall at the most entitle and clothe the employee to avail his ordinary remedy for the breach of contract and wrongful action against him, before the court of plenary jurisdiction

In such a situation, it could not be urged that the fundamental right(s) of the employee had been violated conferring upon him a right to enforce the same in terms of Art.199 and/or under Art.184(3) of the Constitution.

While exercising jurisdiction under Art. 184(3) of the Constitution the Supreme Court was bound by the conditions of the said Article, and moreover by such rules which were laid by the Supreme Court for regulating its jurisdiction, keeping in view the principles of restraints

In cases of contractual service, where the grievance agitated was against a private person, there was no reason that such restraint should not be resorted to by the Supreme Court.

Where a service grievance was agitated by a person/employee who was not governed by statutory rules of service, before the High Court, in terms of Art.199 of the Constitution, such petition shall not be maintainable.