Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)
Dalbir Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others on 3 February, 2026 cites

Ram Phal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 2 February, 1993

16. Further, the petitioner in CWP-3071-2026 is entitled to HRA in view of the judgments rendered by this Court in Rohtas Singh's case (supra) and Ram Phal's case (supra), and the same shall be released within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Further, the petitioner(s) is entitled to all the allowances in terms of Rule 85 of the Rules, 2016, including HRA, which shall be released within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 46 - N P Singh - Full Document

Sate Of Punjab And Ors vs Chaman Lal Goyal on 31 January, 1995

9. A Two Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme court in State of Punjab v. Chaman Lal Goyal 1995(2) SCC 570 Speaking through Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy observed that, "10. Now remains the question of delay. There is undoubtedly a delay of five and a half years in serving the charges. The question is whether the said delay warranted the quashing of charges in this case. It is trite to say that such disciplinary proceeding must be conducted soon after the irregularities are committed or soon after discovering the irregularities. They cannot be initiated after lapse of considerable time. It would not be fair to the delinquent officer. Such delay also makes the task of proving the charges difficult and is thus not also in the interest of administration. Delayed initiation of proceedings is bound to give room for allegations of bias, mala fides and misuse of power. If the delay is too long and is unexplained, the court may well interfere and quash the charges. But how long a delay is too long always depends upon the facts of the given case. Moreover, 4 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 21:10:09 ::: CWP-3010-2026 CWP-3071-2026 -5- if such delay is likely to cause prejudice to the delinquent officer in defending himself, the enquiry has to be interdicted. Wherever such a plea is raised, the court has to weigh the factors appearing for and against the said plea and take a decision on the totality of circumstances. In other words, the court has to indulge in a process of balancing. Now, let us see what are the factors in favour of the respondent......."
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 438 - B P Reddy - Full Document

State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Secretary To ... vs Promod Kumar Ips on 21 August, 2018

13. Moreover, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu vs Parmod Kumar IPS, (2018) 17 SCC 677 and K. Sukhender Reddy vs State of A.P. and another, (1999) 6 SCC 257, has clarified that a delinquent employee cannot be placed under suspension for an indefinite period. Further, it was held 6 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 21:10:09 ::: CWP-3010-2026 CWP-3071-2026 -7- that suspension must necessarily be of a short duration as the delinquent employee is entitled to speedy conclusion of disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 107 - L N Rao - Full Document

K. Sukhendar Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. on 5 April, 1999

13. Moreover, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu vs Parmod Kumar IPS, (2018) 17 SCC 677 and K. Sukhender Reddy vs State of A.P. and another, (1999) 6 SCC 257, has clarified that a delinquent employee cannot be placed under suspension for an indefinite period. Further, it was held 6 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 21:10:09 ::: CWP-3010-2026 CWP-3071-2026 -7- that suspension must necessarily be of a short duration as the delinquent employee is entitled to speedy conclusion of disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 86 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Kharati Lal vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 22 January, 2014

14. In view of the aforesaid discussion and the settled law, both the present petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 03.10.2025 (Annexure P-11) (in CWP-3010-2026) is hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner(s) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order strictly in terms of the law laid down by this Court in Khairati Lal's case (supra).
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - R Gupta - Full Document
1