Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.29 seconds)

S V Sharma vs Director Of Education & Ors. on 28 August, 2017

19. The decision in K.P. Garg (supra) shows that in the facts of that case, the charges were framed against the respondent in 1988 and the inquiry report was submitted on 25.07.1991. The respondent was removed from service on 07.04.1992. In the meantime, he superannuated. Thus, the directions issued by this court permitting the DDA to restart the inquiry came to be issued about 17 years from the date of removal, as opposed to 26 ½ years in the present case. Once again, from the said decision, it is not evident as to how old the respondent was when the said direction was issued by this court.
Delhi High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - V Sanghi - Full Document

Delhi Development Authority vs H L Sharma on 15 December, 2014

8. Learned counsel relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in National Fertilizers Ltd. & Another Vs. P.K. Khanna, (2005) 7 SCC 597; Ram Kumar Vs. State of Haryana, (1987) SCC Supp 582; as well as Division Bench judgment of this Court in Delhi Development Authority Vs. K.P. Garg, (W.P. (C.) No.8151/2008 decided on 05.11.2009). It was contended that these authorities have categorically ruled that, in such circumstances, the disciplinary authority is not compelled to record separate reasons to be given by the Inquiry Officer and that concurrence of that authority with the reasoning, or conclusions of the Inquiry Officer would be sufficient.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S R Bhat - Full Document
1