Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.25 seconds)The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 63 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 59 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Anvar P.V vs P.K.Basheer & Ors on 18 September, 2014
33. Under such circumstances and in view of the law clearly stated as above,
the DVDs containing the video clips and the still photographs, which were the
basis of further enquiry cannot be considered to have been proved in evidence
as per the procedure prescribed under Section 65 (A) and Section 65 (B) of the
Evidence Act read with the findings of the Apex Court in Anvar P.V. (supra)
followed in the subsequent Judgment of Arjun Pandit Rao Khotkar (supra) as
discussed above. That being the position, it will have to be held that the
findings of the Enquiry Officer in the further enquiry conducted in respect of the
DVDs are not sustainable in law. The contents of the DVD cannot be held to
have been proved in evidence which is acceptable in law as per the procedure
prescribed under Section 65 (A) and 65 (B) of the Evidence Act, 1872.
Consequently, the findings arrived at by the Enquiry Officer in the further
enquiry are held to be based on no evidence. The further consequence of this
finding is that the decisions of the Disciplinary Authority imposing the penalty of
removal from service, which will not be a disqualification for further employment
is also held to be a decision which is not permissible in law as the same was
imposed on the findings/recommendations of the Enquiry Officer in the further
enquiry. No independent view of the Disciplinary Authority is discernable from
the impugned order. The enquiry report dated 08.07.2015 of the Enquiry Officer
pursuant to the further enquiry conducted is held to be non-est in law. The
impugned order of penalty imposed by the Disciplinary Authority which is based
Page No.# 55/58
on the findings of the Enquiry Officer pursuant to the further enquiry conducted
therefore cannot be held to be sustainable in law.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The State Of Karnataka vs Umesh on 22 March, 2022
In so far as the judgment referred to by the respondents are concerned,
the principles laid down by the Apex Court in State of Karnataka and Anr. Vs
Umesh reported in(2022) 6 SCC 563 are not in dispute. The Apex Court has
clearly held that the writ court in judicial review will ordinarily not interfered
with the findings of the enquiry proceedings. And the writ court is to exercise
judicial review must restrict its review to determine the following:-