Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.19 seconds)State Of Punjab vs P.L. Singla on 31 July, 2008
In case of Dr. P.L. Singla (supra), the ratio of law
is that if leave is so sanctioned and the unauthorized
absence is condoned, it will not be open to the employer
to thereafter initiate disciplinary proceedings in regard to
the said misconduct unless it had, while sanctioning leave,
7
Writ Petition No.927/2011(s)
reserved the right to take disciplinary action in regard to
the act of indiscipline. In such backdrop, the High Court
had shown its indulgence and had quashed the
punishment of removal, whereas in the cases cited by the
learned counsel for the respondents, the ratio is to be
deduced before any conclusion can be drawn.
Union Of India & Ors vs Ghulam Mohd. Bhat on 20 October, 2005
15. Ratio in case of Ghulam Mohd Bhat (supra) is that
punishment of removal from service for absence without
sanctioned leave can be awarded under Section 11(1) read
with Rule 27 of CRPF Rules by competent authority even if
delinquent is not prosecuted for offence under Sections 9
and 10. In this case, aspect of proportionality too has been
discussed and it has been held that absence from duty for
more than 300 days by CRPF Constable without sanctioned
leave and without justifiable reason cannot be said to be
disproportionate.
Delhi Transport Corporation vs Sardar Singh on 12 August, 2004
In the case of Sardar Singh (supra), the ratio is
that habitual or continuous absence from duty without
sanctioned leave for long, prima facie amounts to "habitual
negligence of duties and lack of interest in work" which
constitutes a misconduct under relevant standing order of
the appellant Corporation. Burden lies on the employee
concerned to prove otherwise by placing relevant material
on record.
Smt. Kanta Devi vs Union Of India And Anr on 12 March, 2003
In case of
Kanta Devi (supra), the ratio is that there is no scope
for interference where penalty is found not
disproportionate to the proved charges.
Section 1 in The Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Section 10 in The Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Shri Bhagwan Lal Arya vs Commissioner Of Police Delhi & Ors on 16 March, 2004
12. Reliance has been placed on the Judgment of
Bhagawan Lal Arya (supra), wherein the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has held that a Police Constable absenting
himself for two months on medical ground without
sanction of leave is not such a grave misconduct or
continued misconduct rendering him completely unfit for
police services.
The Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949
Dal Chand Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2012
8. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other
hand submits that post of ADIGP and that of Commandant
are in the equivalent rank and only difference is that when
a person works in the field, he is designated as
'Commandant' whereas when he functions in the office he
is called 'ADIGP', therefore this ground of punishment
being handed over by a inferior authority is not made out
and thus, the law laid down in case of Dal Chand
Ahirwar (supra) is not applicable to the facts and
circumstances of the case.
1