Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 25 (0.65 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors vs Vijay Shanker Tripathi on 20 July, 2005

Swaroop Chand Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And 2 Others on 29 May, 2014

In view of the aforesaid findings and answers given to the questions referred to us, we do not propose to send the matter back to the Division Bench, as we do not find that any relief can be granted to the petitioner for issuing caste certificate to his son, to belong to Scheduled Caste on the basis of judgment in State of U.P. Vs. Vijay Shankar and another (Supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Neha Mishra Now Tripathi vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 7 July, 2022

The Criminal Case No. 6941 of 2020 (State Vs. Vijay Shanker Tripathi and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0001 of 2020, under Section 498-A, 323, 504 and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District Raibareli pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge, (J.D.) IX Raibareli, is transferred to appropriate/competent court at Chitrakoot.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S K Pachori - Full Document

Kailash Narain Sirothia vs State Of U.P. And Others on 22 July, 2010

In the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Vijay Shanker Tripathi (2005) 6 SCC 135 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that from a long line of decisions it appears to us that whether an order of termination is simpliciter or punitive has ultimately to be decided having due regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. Many a times the distinction between the foundation and motive in relation to an order of termination either thin or overlapping. It may be difficult either to categorize or classify strictly orders of termination simpliciter falling in one or the other category, based on misconduct as foundation for passing the order of termination simpliciter or to motive on the ground of unsuitability to continue in service.
Allahabad High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 1 - A Kumar - Full Document

Mangali Prasad (State) vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 22 March, 2012

In the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Vijay Shanker Tripathi (2005) 6 SCC 135 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that from a long line of decisions it appears to us that whether an order of termination is simpliciter or punitive has ultimately to be decided having due regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. Many a times the distinction between the foundation and motive in relation to an order of termination either thin or overlapping. It may be difficult either to categories or classify strictly orders of termination simpliciter falling in one or the other category, based on misconduct as foundation for passing the order of termination simpliciter or to motive on the ground of unsuitability to continue in service.
Allahabad High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 3 - A Kumar - Full Document

Ram Kumar vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 May, 2012

In the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Vijay Shanker Tripathi (2005) 6 SCC 135 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that from a long line of decisions it appears to us that whether an order of termination is simpliciter or punitive has ultimately to be decided having due regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. Many a times the distinction between the foundation and motive in relation to an order of termination either thin or overlapping. It may be difficult either to categories or classify strictly orders of termination simpliciter falling in one or the other category, based on misconduct as foundation for passing the order of termination simpliciter or to motive on the ground of unsuitability to continue in service.
Allahabad High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - A Kumar - Full Document

Samaidin vs D.M. on 28 March, 2018

Again Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the aforesaid principle in the cases reported in (2005)13 SCC 652 State of U.P. and others versus Ashok Kumar, (2005)6 SCC 135 State of U.P. and others versus Vijay Shanker Tripathi, (2006)9 SCC 167 Hari Ram Maurya versus Union of India and others, (2008)2 SCC 479 Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan versus Mehbub Alam Laskar and (2008)3 SCC 386 Union of India and others versus Rajesh Vyas.
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Siddharth - Full Document

Virendra Kumar Mishra vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 19 August, 2025

12. Relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. vs. Vijay Shanker Tripathi6, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the termination order based on ill-founded allegations of misconduct without any regular departmental inquiry and without securing adequate evidence resulting in any major penalty is invalid. He, therefore, submits that the punishment order is illegal and liable to be set aside.
Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - M R Chauhan - Full Document

Jamuna Prasad And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, ... on 24 March, 2023

The instant criminal revision has been filed by the revisionists for setting aside the impugned order dated 28.02.2023 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Gonda in Sessions Trial No.22 of 2019 titled as State vs. Jay Shanker @ Mohit and others arising out of Case Crime No.386 of 2018, under Sections 302/34, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda.
Allahabad High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Virendra Kumar Mishra vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 19 August, 2025

12. Relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. vs. Vijay Shanker Tripathi6, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the termination order based on ill-founded allegations of misconduct without any regular departmental inquiry and without securing adequate evidence resulting in any major penalty is invalid. He, therefore, submits that the punishment order is illegal and liable to be set aside.
Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - M R Chauhan - Full Document
1   2 3 Next