Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.27 seconds)M.P. State Agro Industries Development ... vs Jahan Khan on 5 September, 2007
The same view was
expressed by this Court in L.K. Verma v.
HMT Ltd. [(2006) 2 SCC 269 : 2006 SCC
(L&S) 278 : AIR 2006 SC 975] and M.P.
State Agro Industries Development Corpn.
Ltd. v. Jahan Khan [(2007) 10 SCC 88 :
Section 23 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Satwati Deswal vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 6 November, 2009
13. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner
further refers to and relies upon a judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India reported in 2010 (1) SCC 126 (Satwati
Deswal Vs. State of Haryana and Ors), wherein in paragraph
no. 05 to 07, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as follows:-
A. V. Venkateswaran, Collector Of ... vs Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani And Another on 4 April, 1961
6. The aforesaid exceptions recognised by
this Court were taken note of by this Court in
Collector of Customs v. Ramchand Sobhraj
Wadhwani [AIR 1961 SC 1506] in which the
Patna High Court CWJC No.22530 of 2013 dt.11-05-2026
12/20
Constitution Bench laid down the principles
of the above exceptions when writ
application could be entertained even if an
alternative remedy was available to an
aggrieved party.
Section 18 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Nutan Kumar Prabhat vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 20 April, 2022
21. A similar view has also been taken by this
Court in the case of Nutan Kumar Prabhat vs. The State of
Bihar & Ors., passed in CWJC No. 4696 of 2023, wherein in
paragraph no. 25, it has been held as follows:-
Ravi Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 July, 2023
"12. Once the charge originally framed
against Dr. Narain was successfully
defended by him, the Ethics Committee
(on being prodded by the Executive
Committee) proceeded to hold Dr. Narain
guilty of an act of omission, which was at
variance with the charge. This was
without informing him of the same and
without calling for his explanation. There
Patna High Court CWJC No.22530 of 2013 dt.11-05-2026
17/20
has, indeed, been a breach of principles
of natural justice. A coordinate bench of
this Court in Ravi Oraon v. State of
Jharkhand20 has held that once a
delinquent employee had successfully
defended a charge, the disciplinary
authority, in absence of a fresh show
cause notice, cannot punish the
delinquent employee on a completely
different charge which was not framed.
This would be a denial of fair and
reasonable opportunity of hearing and in
violation of the principles of natural
justice. Thus, the Executive Committee
could not have imposed the punishment
without issuing a fresh show cause notice
and/or without granting Dr. Narain a fair
and reasonable opportunity to respond to
the new/alternative charge under
consideration. We quite appreciate that
the Executive Committee's decision, to
that extent, does suffer from a serious
flaw."
Nigam Prakash Narain vs National Medical Commission on 13 October, 2023
18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in a case
reported in 2026 SCC Online SC 813 (Dr. Nigam Prakash
Narain Vs. National Medical Commission & Ors.), in
paragraph no. 12 has held as follows:-
1