Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (2.13 seconds)
Documents citing Smt. R.S. Khan vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 13 December, 2004

Sunil Kumar Mishra vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 2 August, 2019

In that regard, reliance was placed on a Division Bench decision of this Court in R.S. Khan Vs. State of U.P. : 2005 (1) ESC 515. In the alternative, it was claimed that consequent to retirement of Suraj on 30.06.2006, the short-term vacancy got converted into substantive vacancy, as a result, the appointment of Sunil stood automatically terminated by operation of law and therefore there was no requirement to seek approval under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982.
Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Smt. Kesari Devi W/O Shri Gulab Singh, ... vs State Of U.P. Through Principal ... on 18 August, 2005

103. A Division Bench of this Court in Smt R.S. Khan v. State of U.P. and Ors., (2003) 1 UPLBEC 81, placing reliance upon earlier judgment of this Court in S.P. Goel v. State of U.P., 1992 AWC 394; and Naseemuddin v. State of U.P., (2000) 3 ESC 1611, held that depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the inquiry should be held complying with the principles of natural justice, giving opportunity of defence to the erring elected office bearer and State Government must pass a speaking and reasoned order considering the explanation of the elected office bearer. In such a case, the copy of the complaints and the material/evidence collected by the State Government substantiating the said allegations, has to be furnished to the office bearer sought to be removed and if in his explanation, he disputes the veracity thereof or genuineness of any document etc., it would be necessary for the State Government to hold a full fledged inquiry appointing an inquiry officer, placing the entire material before him and giving an opportunity to both sides to lead evidence in support of their cases and also to examine the parties/witnesses thereof.
Allahabad High Court Cites 164 - Cited by 16 - Full Document

Munna Lal Gupta Chairman, Nagar ... vs State Of U.P. Through Chief Secretary, ... on 12 May, 2005

35. A Division Bench of this Court in Smt. R.S. Khan v. State of U.P. and Ors., (2003) 1 UPLBEC 81, placing reliance upon earlier judgment of this Court in S.P. Goel v. State of U.P., 1992 AWC 394; and Naseemuddin v. State of U.P., 2000 (3) ESC 1611, held that depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the enquiry should be held complying with the principles of natural justice, giving opportunity of defence to the erring elected office bearer and State Government must pass a speaking and reasoned order considering the explanation of the elected office bearer.
Allahabad High Court Cites 48 - Cited by 3 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Nand Kishore Gaur vs Regional Dy. Director Of Education, ... on 8 November, 2017

To understand the combined effect of the dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous and at the same time the status of the interim orders passed in both the writ petitions, a decision by a Division Bench of this Court explaining the said position that can be aptly quoted from Smt. R.S.Khan Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2005 (1) ESC, 515. The Court in paragraph nos.15 to 17 held as under :
Allahabad High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1