Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.22 seconds)
Jai Bhagwan Chhachia vs Union Of India Through Comptroller & ... on 8 October, 2014 cites

Union Of India & Ors vs P.Thayagarajan on 24 November, 1998

16. A perusal of the above passage makes it clear that it is not a rule of the thumb that in no circumstances, come what may, de-novo inquiry cannot be ordered. Facts of each case have to be seen in the light of observation in above quoted law. Our own jurisdictional High Court has considered a similar controversy in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Shashi Bhushan and another , 2011(1) RSJ 506, where Division Bench, after noticing the judgment (relied upon by the applicant herein also) in case of K.R.Dev Vs. CCE, 1971(2) SCC 102 and Union of India Vs. P. Thayagaraian, 1999(1) SCC 733, has come to the conclusion that if the disciplinary authority comes with definite finding that there is procedural lapse in conducting the enquiry, then he can order de novo enquiry under rule 15(1) of the 1965 Rules.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 49 - Full Document

The Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Sashi Bhushan Biswas on 12 December, 1969

16. A perusal of the above passage makes it clear that it is not a rule of the thumb that in no circumstances, come what may, de-novo inquiry cannot be ordered. Facts of each case have to be seen in the light of observation in above quoted law. Our own jurisdictional High Court has considered a similar controversy in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Shashi Bhushan and another , 2011(1) RSJ 506, where Division Bench, after noticing the judgment (relied upon by the applicant herein also) in case of K.R.Dev Vs. CCE, 1971(2) SCC 102 and Union of India Vs. P. Thayagaraian, 1999(1) SCC 733, has come to the conclusion that if the disciplinary authority comes with definite finding that there is procedural lapse in conducting the enquiry, then he can order de novo enquiry under rule 15(1) of the 1965 Rules.
Calcutta High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Police And Anr vs Mehar Singh on 2 July, 2013

23. Now dealing with the last poser whether the charges are to be set aside on being acquitted in a criminal case on the same set of charges even if the departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings have been conducted simultaneously, let it be stated that it is a well settled proposition of law that the departmental as well as criminal proceedings can go on simultaneously. This issue too has been set at rest by the Honble Apex Court of the country in a number of cases including in Deputy Inspector General v. S. Samuthiram [(2013) 1 SCC 598] and Commissioner of Police, New Delhi & Anr. V. Mehar Singh [(2013) 7 SCC 685]. In this case too the fact remains that the applicant has not shown any rule or regulation applicable to him that once he has been acquitted by a Criminal Court, as a matter of right, he should be reinstated in service, despite all the disciplinary proceedings. In otherwise there is no rule of automatic reinstatement on acquittal by a Criminal Court even though the charges levelled against the delinquent before the Enquiry Officer as well as the Criminal Court are the same.
Supreme Court of India Cites 31 - Cited by 370 - Full Document

Central Bank Of India Ltd vs Karunamoy Banerjee on 18 August, 1967

In the case of Central Bank of India vs. Karunamoy Banerjee, AIR 1968 SC 266 the Supreme Court has observed that "the rules of natural justice, as laid down by this Court, will have to be observed, in the conduct of a domestic enquiry against a workman. If the allegations are denied by the workman, it is needless to state that the burden of proving the truth of those allegations will be on the management; and the witnesses called, by the management, must be allowed to be cross-examined, by the workman, and the latter must also be given an opportunity to examine himself and adduce any other evidence that he might choose, in support of his plea. But, if the workman admits his guilt, to insist upon the management to let in evidence about the allegations, will, in our opinion, only be an empty formality". In nutshell, if an employee against whom disciplinary proceedings are instituted, admits his guilt, there is no necessity for the management to hold any enquiry.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 73 - C A Vaidyialingam - Full Document
1   2 Next