Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.19 seconds)
Manish Pradhan vs Union Of India on 18 January, 2023 cites

Lav Nigam vs Chairman And Managing Director, Iti ... on 17 March, 2004

13. It is to be seen further that as per the said report (Annexure P/11) submitted by the enquiry officer on 13.05.2013, the charges levelled against the petitioner were found to be proved partially but the disciplinary authority, however, did not concur with the same and held that both the charges are found to be proved beyond doubt based upon the documentary evidence. It is, however, to be noted at this juncture that while disagreeing with the said report of the enquiry officer and before recording such a finding, a notice was to be issued to the petitioner and would call upon him for his explanation in the first instance before recording the said finding as it is settled principles of law that on receiving the report of the enquiry officer, the disciplinary authority may or may not agree with the same, but in case of disagreement, the disciplinary authority has to record the reasons for its disagreement and only after affording an opportunity of hearing to the delinquent may record his own findings, if the evidence available on record is sufficient for such exercise in the light of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Lav Nigam vs. Chairman & MD. ITI Ltd. and another (supra), wherein it has been observed at paragraphs 10 and 13 as under :-
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 167 - Y Singh - Full Document
1