Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.27 seconds)
Bhupendra Singh Kushwah vs State Of M.P. on 27 October, 2015 cites

Bhupendra Singh Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 November, 2014

Under such circumstances, in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.K. Dhawan (supra), in the opinion of this Court, the charge-sheet issued to the petitioner falls under category (iv) and (v) mentioned in para 28 of the said judgment and, therefore, contention advanced in that behalf by 10 Writ Petition No.3878/2013 [Bhupendra Singh Kushwah vs. State of M.P. and another] the counsel for respondents/State is upheld. The judgments cited by the counsel for the petitioner, viz.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. vs Mansukhlal Chhaganlal Desai on 24 January, 1992

Union of India vs. R.K. Desai, 1993 (2) SCC 49, Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar v. Union of India, (1997) 7 SCC 409 and order dated 22/1/2015 in Civil Appeal No.1159/2015, Virendra Kumar Singh vs. State of M.P. and others, are of no assistance to the petitioner. Respondent no.2 since is competent to impose minor penalty under Rule 10 of the Rules of 1966, he shall fall within the definition of disciplinary authority, as defined under Rule 2 (d) of the Rules of 1966. The contention of the petitioner that respondent no.2 is not competent to impose major penalty upon the petitioner, hence, does not fall within the definition of disciplinary authority is held to be misconceived and based on misreading of the provisions contained in Rule 2 (d) of the Rules of 1966, as the disciplinary authority means the the authority competent to impose on a government servant any of the penalties specified in Rule 10 of the Rules of 1966, which includes minor penalty as well as major penalty.
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 8 - S H Kapadia - Full Document

Union Of India And Ors vs K. K. Dhawan on 27 January, 1993

Under such circumstances, in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.K. Dhawan (supra), in the opinion of this Court, the charge-sheet issued to the petitioner falls under category (iv) and (v) mentioned in para 28 of the said judgment and, therefore, contention advanced in that behalf by 10 Writ Petition No.3878/2013 [Bhupendra Singh Kushwah vs. State of M.P. and another] the counsel for respondents/State is upheld. The judgments cited by the counsel for the petitioner, viz.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 229 - S Mohan - Full Document
1