Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)

Constable Chander Bhan vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi Through on 26 May, 2010

5. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the applicant confined his submissions to the two points, namely, (i) the impugned action of the respondents being violative of Rule 15 (2) of the Rules; and (ii) the findings of the inquiry officer against the applicant being vitiated on account of his cross examination of PW1 to PW5. The learned counsel did not press on the issue of validity of initiation of disciplinary inquiry with the approval of Joint Commissioner of Police in view of Full Bench order in the case of Chander Bhan vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (OA 577/2007). However, it has been contended that while ordering initiation of inquiry, the concerned authority has to examine the desirability of initiating criminal prosecution vis-`-vis departmental inquiry and take a conscious decision thereon indicating due application of mind by ascribing the reasons based on which such decision has been taken. In the absence of this, the order for initiating departmental inquiry will stand vitiated for non-application of mind and in the result, non-compliance of the requirement of Rule 15 (2) of the Rules.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 12 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

U.O.I. And Ors. vs Rajbir Singh Khanna And Anr. on 24 August, 2001

In support of point (i) above, the learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgments of this Tribunal in the case of Union of India and others vs. Rajbir Singh in RA No.38/2008 in OA 624/2005 decided on 6.1.2010 and Ravinder Singh vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others in OA 1772/2008 decided on 23.2.2010. In support of his second argument that the inquiry officer cannot cross examine the witnesses, the learned counsel has referred to the following cases:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 13 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Ravinder Singh vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 15 October, 2004

In support of point (i) above, the learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgments of this Tribunal in the case of Union of India and others vs. Rajbir Singh in RA No.38/2008 in OA 624/2005 decided on 6.1.2010 and Ravinder Singh vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others in OA 1772/2008 decided on 23.2.2010. In support of his second argument that the inquiry officer cannot cross examine the witnesses, the learned counsel has referred to the following cases:-
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 16 - Cited by 25 - Full Document
1