Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.19 seconds)
Muthukulam Service Co-Operative Bank ... vs G.Krishna Kumari on 12 April, 2023 cites

Kodanchery Service Co-Operative Bank ... vs Joshy Varghese on 13 January, 2020

3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant bank submitted that the reliance placed on Kodanchery Service Co-operative Bank's case supra by the Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge appears to be not correct in as much as the said judgment was rendered on an erroneous interpretation of the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules.
Kerala High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 28 - Full Document

President, Pudupariyaram Service ... vs Rugmini Amma And Ors. on 14 November, 1995

9. The Kodanchery judgment was rendered without considering the dictum laid down by an earlier Division Bench in President Puthupariyaram Service Co-operative Society vs. Rugmini Amma & Others reported in 1996(1) KLT 100. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the subsequent judgment which was rendered without considering an earlier judgment having the WA No.934 of 2022 & connected cases 8 similar bench constitution, saying the former will have an overriding effect over the latter. Therefore, the Kodanchery judgment which was rendered misinterpreting the provisions of KCS Rules and also the various judicial pronouncements should be treated as bad law and the dictum laid down is unsustainable. Despite being contended, the learned Single Judge totally failed to consider this relevant aspect while rendering the impugned judgment.
Kerala High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 17 - K T Thomas - Full Document

Inspector General Of Police And Anr vs Thavasiappan on 25 January, 1996

Inspector General of Police v. Thavasiappan - (1996) 2 SCC 145 In this case, a departmental proceeding was initiated against a Sub Inspector of Police and a Deputy Superintendent of Police was appointed as inquiry officer and he framed charges, held an inquiry and based on his report, the Deputy Inspector General of Police imposed the penalty. The said punishment was challenged before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal mainly contending that only the authority competent to award the proposed penalty could have framed and served the charge memo and since the charge memo was issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, the inquiry conducted is bad in law and accepting the said contention the punishment imposed was set aside. WA No.934 of 2022 & connected cases 10 The Apex Court set aside the said finding mainly holding that otherwise competent authorities like appointing authority, disciplinary authority or the controlling authority are empowered to issue charge sheet and conduct inquiry.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 74 - G T Nanavati - Full Document
1