Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 445 (0.98 seconds)M.C.R. Meshram vs State Bank Of Indore Now Sbi on 21 February, 2022
"It is trite that a judgment of acquittal passed in favour of the
employees by giving benefit of doubt per se would not be binding
Wps 2115 of 2011
10
upon the employer" [See Bank of India and Another v. Degala
Suryanarayana(1999) 5 SCC 762;Ajit Kumar Nag v. General
Manager (PJ), Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,Haldia and Others(2005)
7 SCC 764]
Aejaz Hussain vs The State Of Karnataka & Ors on 29 May, 2020
We are, therefore,
unable to uphold the contention of the
appellant that since he was acquitted
by a criminal court, the impugned
order [Ajit Kumar Nag v. Indian Oil
Corpn. Ltd., 2004 SCC OnLine Cal 59
: (2004) 4 LLN 512] dismissing him
from service deserves to be quashed
and set aside."
C.Subbarayan vs The Director Of Rural Development on 9 June, 2022
Shri.Babusab vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 December, 2020
In criminal law, burden of
proof is on the prosecution and unless the
prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the
accused "beyond reasonable doubt", he cannot
be convicted by a court of law. In a departmental
enquiry, on the other hand, penalty can be
imposed on the delinquent officer on a finding
recorded on the basis of "preponderance of
probability". Acquittal of the appellant by a
Judicial Magistrate, therefore, does not ipso facto
absolve him from the liability under the
disciplinary jurisdiction of the Corporation. We
are, therefore, unable to uphold the contention
of the appellant that since he was acquitted by a
criminal court, the impugned order [Ajit Kumar
Nag v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., 2004 SCC On Line
Cal 59: (2004) 4 LLN 512] dismissing him from
service deserves to be quashed and set aside."
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Govt. Of ... vs U.P. State Public Services Tribunal, ... on 17 October, 2019
18. The exposition has been further affirmed by a three Judge Bench of this Court in Ajit Kumar Nag Vs. General Manager (PJ), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Haldia and Others ,2005 (7) SCC 764, this Court held as under: -
Jameer Pasha vs State Of Karnataka on 28 June, 2022
In criminal law, burden of
proof is on the prosecution and unless the
prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the
accused "beyond reasonable doubt", he cannot
be convicted by a court of law. In a
departmental enquiry, on the other hand,
penalty can be imposed on the delinquent officer
on a finding recorded on the basis of
"preponderance of probability". Acquittal of the
appellant by a Judicial Magistrate, therefore,
does not ipso facto absolve him from the liability
under the disciplinary jurisdiction of the
Corporation. We are, therefore, unable to uphold
the contention of the appellant that since he was
acquitted by a criminal court, the impugned
order [Ajit Kumar Nag v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd.,
2004 SCC On Line Cal 59: (2004) 4 LLN 512]
dismissing him from service deserves to be
quashed and set aside."
Masina Hospital vs Sharda K Solanki And Ors on 25 February, 2025
We are, therefore, unable to uphold the contention of the
appellant that since he was acquitted by a criminal court, the impugned
order [Ajit Kumar Nag v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., 2004 SCC OnLine Cal
59] dismissing him from service deserves to be quashed and set aside."
Masina Hospital vs Standley Willam Sure And Ors on 25 February, 2025
We are, therefore, unable to uphold the contention of the
appellant that since he was acquitted by a criminal court, the impugned
order [Ajit Kumar Nag v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., 2004 SCC OnLine Cal
59] dismissing him from service deserves to be quashed and set aside."
Masina Hospital vs Meena Kelshikar And Ors on 25 February, 2025
We are, therefore, unable to uphold the contention of the
appellant that since he was acquitted by a criminal court, the impugned
order [Ajit Kumar Nag v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., 2004 SCC OnLine Cal
59] dismissing him from service deserves to be quashed and set aside."