Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing Satbir Singh Constable No. 902/Rtk vs The Director General Of Police on 11 January, 2013

Karnail Singh vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 24 April, 2015

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that as per Rule 16.2 (1) of Punjab Police Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), the order of dismissal can be passed only for gravest act of misconduct. The absence from duty is not the gravest act as in the explanation to the said Rule, eight categories have been specified. Absence from duty has not been considered as gravest act of misconduct but still the petitioner has been dismissed from service debarring him from civil employment and now he cannot be appointed to any public post. Learned senior counsel further contends that 18 years of service rendered by the petitioner has not been considered while dismissing him from service and penalty imposed upon the petitioner is extremely on higher side. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also contends that the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed only on the ground of delay and the petitioner has not been heard on merits and the impugned order passed in the appeal is also contrary to the principles of natural justice. It is also the argument of learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been POOJA SHARMA 2015.05.05 09:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document C.W.P. No. 2859 of 2011 (3) supplied the requisite documents and, therefore, he could not file reply. Learned senior counsel has also relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Harjit Singh and Another Vs. State of Punjab and another 2007 (4) SLR 645, Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra and another (2014) 9 SCC 129, of this Court in Satbir Singh Constable Vs. The Director General of Police, Haryana and others 2013 (3) SCT 76, State of Punjab Vs. Gurkeerat Singh 2002 (3) SCT 623, Dhan Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others 2009 (1) RSJ 62, Virender Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others 2014 (1) SCT 561 and Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2013-1) PLR 323, in support of his contentions.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - D Chaudhary - Full Document

Virender Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others on 3 October, 2013

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Satbir Singh Constable v. The Director General of Police, Haryana and others, passed in CWP No.11500 of 1997, decided on 11.01.2013 to contend that in the facts and circumstances mentioned above the petitioner is entitled for pension for his qualifying service. He has further argued that dismissal order with retrospective effect was invalid and illegal and therefore the impugned orders cannot stand in the eyes of law.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dhani Devi And Others vs The Dgp Haryana And Others on 26 November, 2013

It remains a fact that Head Constable Dhanpat Singh had continuously been playing truant. The petitioners have sought conversion of punishment of dismissal to that of compulsory retirement so that the petitioners who are legal heirs of the deceased, are saved from continued starvation as dismissal of the deceased has resulted even in non-release of family pension to them. Support has been sought from authority cited as Satbir Singh Constable Vs. The Director General of Police, Haryana and others CWP No.11500 of 1997 decided on 11.01.2013 wherein order of dismissal was coverted into order of compulsory retirement. It is claimed that the competent authority neither considered his merit certificates nor his length of service in terms of Rule 16.2(1) ibid.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1