Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (1.54 seconds)
Akshaya Kumar Das vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 18 October, 2022 cites

Union Of India And Ors vs Mohd. Ramzan Khan on 20 November, 1990

11. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that since the Petitioner prior to passing of the impugned order under Annexure-6 was never provided with the copy of the enquiry report and no show cause whatsoever was issued prior to imposing the order of punishment i.e. dismissal from service, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Others vs. Mohd. Ramzan Khan reported in (1991) 1 SCC -588.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 668 - R B Misra - Full Document

Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr on 30 March, 1999

32. In our opinion, such facts and evidence in the department as well as criminal proceedings were the same without there being any iota of difference, the appellant should succeed. The distinction which is usually proved between the departmental and criminal proceedings Page 7 of 10 // 8 // on the basis of the approach and burden of proof would not be applicable in the instant case. Though finding recorded in the domestic enquiry was found to be valid by the Courts below, when there was an honourable acquittal of the employee during the pendency of the proceedings challenging the dismissal, the same requires to be taken note of and the decision in Paul Anthony's case (supra) will apply. We, therefore, hold that the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be allowed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 1683 - S S Ahmad - Full Document
1