Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.24 seconds)

Union Of India And Another vs Tulsiram Patel And Others on 11 July, 1985

From afore quoted judgment observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Tulsi Ram Patel's case, it is evident that the Court was of the view that the mention made by the disciplinary authority in the order of compulsory retirement about the employee's conviction for the offence under Section 332 I.P.C. and the nature of offence committed was sufficient indication of proper application of mind to the facts of the case. The order was held to be eloquent and self speaking. The Hon'ble Apex Court went to the extent of saying that the conduct of the employee (who had been convicted for the offence under Section 332 I.P.C.) merited penalty of dismissal from Government service and by imposing upon him, only the consequence of compulsory retirement, the disciplinary authority had acted leniently. In this background, the said 8 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5747/2015 Shamsher Khan. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. judgment also is of no help to the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 138 - Cited by 1450 - D P Madon - Full Document
1   2 Next