Karnataka High Court
Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran Pvt ... vs N Devadoss on 19 July, 2011
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy
$5.} THIS EVE. IS CQMENC: ON FOR QRDERS THIS EEAY, THE CQURT MADE THE FOLLOVVENG: ORDER
Though this petition is listedo for ord'e1'ee§_':v.:he€ '"
consent of the learned Counsel for ti%ier.partie'::~,"isufihafigri heard and disposed of by thiV_-3_v'e1jCIer'.A'v- 2
2. The petitioner¥~e_mpio$reAr': ' {Z.StH€'C'1V V vhvouestion the order dt. '7//201 the Central Government Io-egoour Court, for short in the negative on the domestic enquiry eondueretr 'aegfiai11erA:--h:.'rhe'--irespondent was not fair and proper The4.Vo'o$eI'"i?atrone of the Supreme Court in D. P. DELHI ADMN. 8: OTHERS', in the erireJurneizi13VeeSfV':s' apposite:
"'z'%j:ere:':vas a time when it was ihoughi prudent (:z}i:.;_:lt' wise policy to decide preliminary issues " , Lfirste. Bur the iime appears to have arriveci for :1 Areversai of that policy. We ihinlc ii' is better that M