Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.25 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
The Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force Act, 1992
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Rajendra Singh Bhadoriya vs Union Of India on 24 September, 2019
11. The judgment in the case of Rajendra Singh Bhadoriya (supra), relied
upon by the counsel for the respondents, is different on facts. The action was
taken as also the orders were passed by the respondents therein in the State of
West Bengal, it is only after passing of the order, the petitioner subsequently
settled down at Gwalior. In those facts this Court held that the entire cause of
action arose at West Bengal and no cause of action was available to the petitioner
therein to approach this Court.
Nawal Kishore Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors on 7 August, 2014
9. Order of dismissal passed by respondent No.3 was served upon the
petitioner in Arunachal Pradesh and in the impugned dismissal order address of
petitioner was mentioned village Thatipur colony, Teshil Gwalior (M.P.). Since
petitioner was the native of District Gwalior (M.P.), therefore, after removal from
service, he came back to his native place at Gwalior. He challenged the said order
of removal by way of appeal before the Deputy Inspector General (NE-I), Indian
Tibbat Border Police Force, SHQ (NE) Khating Hill, Papumpara, Itanagar,
Arunachal Pradesh. Although, initial order of removal was passed in Arunachal
Pradesh but later on all proceedings were conducted by the petitioner while
residing at Gwalior. Petitioner had sent the appeal from his resident at Bhind and
appeal rejection order was served to the petitioner within the jurisdiction of this
Court i.e., his residence at Bhind which falls within a jurisdiction of this Court
and in similar fact situation, the Apex Court in the case of Nawal Kishore
Sharma Vs. Union of India and Ors., reported in 2014 (9) SCC 329, wherein
the appellant of said case received the order of removal (on medical ground) at
Mundra (Gujrat) but being the native of District Gaya (Bihar), he made all
correspondence from district Gaya and the Hon'ble Apex Court found that the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MONIKA
SHARMA
Signing time: 9/27/2025
10:23:07 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:24317
7 WP. No. 3077 of 2008
case of jurisdiction within the scope of Patna High Court. The fact situation of
the present case is identical and virtually overlapping.
State Bank Of India And Ors vs Samarendra Kishore Endow And Anr on 18 January, 1994
16. As per Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India and
Ors. Vs. Samarendra Kishore Endow and another reported in (1994) 2 SCC
537, paragraphs 14 and 15 read as under:-
V. Ramana vs A.P.S.R.T.C. & Ors on 5 September, 2005
In case of
Ramana's (supra), the misconduct was in the context of performance of duties of
the post held by the incumbent. In the present case, clearly and evidently, the
second marriage of the petitioner has nothing to do with either his official
position or discharge of official duties.
Colour-Chem Limited vs A.L. Alaspurkar & Ors on 5 February, 1998
In the case of Colour-chem Ltd. Vs. A.L. Alaspurkar reported in (1998)
3 SCC 192, the Apex Court held that if the punishment imposed is shockingly
disproportionate to the charges levelled against a delinquent, it may be open to
the Court to interfere.
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation ... vs Mahesh Kumar Mishra And Ors on 15 March, 2000
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UP State Transport
Corporation Vs. Mahesh Kumar Linkra reported in (2000) 3 SCC 450 again same
view has been taken by Hon'ble Apex Court.