Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing N.Subramanian vs The Group Commandant on 1 April, 2009

K.Muniappan vs The Secretary To Government on 6 November, 2009

(d) recording the findings on each imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour.", which again is in pari materia with that of Rule 17(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 and Rule 3(a) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, the Division Bench of D.Murugesan and C.S.Karnan,J.J. in N.Subramanian v. Group Commandant, CISF and another, 2009 Current Indian Judgments 739 (Madras) held that even in cases of imposing minor penalties, the disciplinary authority has to give opportunity to the delinquent employee, conduct enquiry to prove the charges and indicate reasons for punishment.
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - P Jyothimani - Full Document

C.Ravichandran vs Deputy Commissioner Of Police on 13 October, 2009

10.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though Rule 3(a) of the Rules, does not contemplate an enquiry, if the Department has chosen to hold an enquiry, the petitioner should have been given opportunity to put forth his views and the report of the Enquiry Officer should be furnished to the delinquent, before passing any order based thereon. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in N.Subramanian Vs. Group Commandant, C.I.S.F. and another, reported in 2009 CIJ 739 Mad.
Madras High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - D Hariparanthaman - Full Document
1