Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.31 seconds)
Documents citing Smt.Tripta Kumari vs The State Of Haryana And Another on 12 July, 2011

Ram Dia vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 13 January, 2016

This issue has come up for consideration before this Court in a case of Smt. Tripta Kumari vs. State of Haryana and another, 2012 (1) S.C.T 455 wherein the petitioner was punished with stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect without holding any enquiry under Rule 8 of Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules. The petitioner preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed. This Court allowed the writ petition and held that stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect would amount to major penalty and regular inquiry is must to impose such penalty. Punishment imposed on petitioner without holding any inquiry would be rendered illegal and voilative of the procedure established by law. In para 7, it has been observed as under:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - R Bahri - Full Document

Inderjit Singh vs Pseb And Anr on 3 November, 2025

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of "Smt. Tripta Kumari Vs. The State of Haryana and another", reported as 2011 SCC OnLine P&H 7772 had relied upon the above said judgment to further hold that the stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect is a major penalty and in the said circumstances, it was necessary for the authorities to have conducted the inquiry in accordance with the rules and regulations and since the same had not been done, the impugned order in the said case was also set aside. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced herein below: -
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - V Bahl - Full Document

Balaour Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 4 November, 2025

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of "Smt. Tripta Kumari Vs. The State of Haryana and another", reported as 2011 SCC OnLine P&H 7772 had relied upon the above said judgment to further hold that the stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect is a major penalty and in the said circumstances, it was necessary for the authorities to have conducted the inquiry in accordance with the rules and regulations and since the same had not been done, the impugned order in the said case was also set aside. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced herein below: -
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - V Bahl - Full Document
1