Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)
Kiritbhai Shankar Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 27 December, 2018 cites

Anant R Kulkarni vs Y.P.Education Society & Ors on 26 April, 2013

5.1 In Anant R. Kulkarni v. Y.P. Education Society [(2013) 6 SCC 515] the Supreme Court observed in paragraph 14 with regard to belated conduct of inquiry that whether the court would be inclined to quash the departmental proceedings on the ground of delay would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case. It was observed that though ordinarily the court should not set aside the departmental inquiry or quashed the charges on the ground of delay in initiation in the proceedings, the test of prejudice caused by delay may be a overriding consideration. The court must weigh all the facts to finally make up its mind.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 262 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

M.V. Bijlani vs Union Of India & Ors on 5 April, 2006

5.2 In M.V. Bijlani v. Union of India [(2006) 5 SCC 88] the issue of belated commencement of departmental inquiry was dealt with by the Apex Court. It was observed in the facts of the case that the High Court failed to take into consideration that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated after six years and they continued for a period of seven years. It was stated that thus initiation of the disciplinary proceedings as also continuation thereof after such a long time evidently prejudiced the delinquent officer.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 837 - S B Sinha - Full Document

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Bani Singh And Another on 5 April, 1990

5.3 The Supreme Court in State of M.P. v. Bani Page 5 of 9 C/SCA/19766/2015 CAV JUDGMENT Singh [1990 Supp SCC738] also leaned towards quashment of the proceedings on the ground of delay which, according to the Apex Court, occasioned prejudice. It was observed and held thus, "The irregularities which were the subject-matter of the enquiry are said to have taken place between the years 1975-77. It is not the case of the department that they were not aware of the said irregularities, if any, and came to know it only in 1987. According to them even in April 1977 there was doubt about the involvement of the officer in the said irregularities and the investigations were going on since then. If that is so, it is unreasonable to thing that they would have taken more than 12 years to initiate the disciplinary proceedings as stated by the Tribunal. There is no satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay in issuing the charge memo and we are also of the view that it will be unfair to permit the departmental enquiry to be proceeded with at this stage."
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 761 - V Ramaswami - Full Document

P.V. Mahadevan vs M.D. Tamil Nadu Housing Board on 8 August, 2005

(Para 4) 5.4 In P.V. Mahadevan v. MD, T.N. Housing Board [(2005) 6 SCC 636] the Supreme Court considered the aspect of delay of 10 years in initiating the departmental inquiry against the appellant, where no convincing explanation was given for such delay. The Supreme Court took view that allowing the respondent to proceed further with the departmental proceedings on such distance of time would be very prejudicial to the appellant. It was observed that the appellant already suffered enough on account of inordinate delay.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 781 - Full Document
1