TMI Blog1964 (11) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es, 1950. The respondent was a cashier in the employ of the Amritsar Branch of the appellant Bank. He was suspended on May 5, 1952 and finally dismissed from the service of the appellant on January 24, 1959. In the meantime, he was prosecuted for offences under ss. 408 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. He was acquitted by the Trial Magistrate oil March 21, 1955, and a revision petition against the order of acquittal was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on June 23, 1955. On January 9, 1961, he filed a petition under s. 3 3 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Presiding officer of the Central Government Labour Court, Delhi, claiming from the appellant payment of a sum of ₹ 16,000 in terms of paragraph 521 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted on May 5, 1962. On June 1, 1962, the petition was again returned to the appellant with an intimation that the same should be presented at Chandigarh. Thereafter, the appellant did not proceed with the petition, and did not move the High Court for the issue of a certificate under Arts. 132(1) and 133. On July 7, 1962, the appellant presented in this Court a petition for special leave to appeal. In this petition, the appellant raised various questions of law as to the proper interpretation of Art. 227 of the Constitution, and also set out the facts relating to the presentation of the petition under Arts. 132(1) and 133. On August 21, 1962, the appellant was granted ex parte special leave to appeal under Art. 136 of the Constitution. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for special leave to appeal in this case could be entertained, unless the High Court had been first moved and had refused to grant the certificate. Under 0. 45, r. 1 of the Supreme Court Rules. this Court could, for sufficient reasons shown, excuse the appellant from compliance with the requirements of 0. 13, r. 2. Up till now, the appellant has not applied to this Court for exemption from compliance with 0. 13, r. 2. In the absence of any order of exemption, 0. 13, r. 2 applies with full force, and peremptorily enjoins that no application to this Court for special leave to appeal shall be entertained. The rule is mandatory. The special leave to appeal being obtained in contravention of the rule is liable to be revoked. Relying on the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
