Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (1.27 seconds)Union Of India & Ors vs Gyan Chand Chattar on 28 May, 2009
1977 SCC (L&S) 298:(1977)1 SLR 750] was
reiterated : (Gyan Chand Chattar case [Union
of India v. Gyan Chand Chattar, (2009) 12 SCC
78:(2010) 1 SCC (L&S) 129], SCC p. 88, paras
35-36)
"35. ... an enquiry is to be conducted
against any person giving strict
adherence to the statutory provisions
and principles of natural justice. The
charges should be specific, definite and
giving details of the incident which
formed the basis of charges. No enquiry
can be sustained on vague charges.
State Of Haryana And Anr. vs Rattan Singh on 22 March, 1977
The ratio of the
judgment emerges in the subsequent passages
of the judgment, where the test of relevant
material and compliance with natural justice as
laid down in Rattan Singh [State of
Haryana v. Rattan Singh, (1977) 2 SCC 491:
Chairman & Md V.S.P. & Ors vs Goparaju Sri Prabhakara Hari Babu on 5 March, 2008
13. The Hon'ble Apex Court in (2008) 5 SCC 569 in
the case of CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
V.S.P. AND OTHERS v/s GOPURAJU SRI
19
PRABHAKARA HARI BABU, the Hon'ble Apex Court
has held that the High Court in exercise of its
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India also cannot, on the basis of sympathy or
sentiment over-turn a legal order. Relevant
paragraphs 20, 21 and 22 of the above judgment
reads as follows:
M/S Maruti Udyog Ltd vs Ram Lal & Ors on 25 January, 2005
reasoned order only on sympathy or sentiments.
(See Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Ram Lal, State of
Bihar v. Amrendra Kumar Mishra; SBI v.
Mahatma Mishra; State of Karnataka v.
Amreerbi; State of M.P. v. Sanjay Kumar Pathak
and Urrar Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd., v.
Surji Devi.).
State Of Bihar & Ors vs Amrendra Kumar Mishra on 26 September, 2006
reasoned order only on sympathy or sentiments.
(See Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Ram Lal, State of
Bihar v. Amrendra Kumar Mishra; SBI v.
Mahatma Mishra; State of Karnataka v.
Amreerbi; State of M.P. v. Sanjay Kumar Pathak
and Urrar Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd., v.
Surji Devi.).
Regional Manager, Sbi vs Mahatma Mishra on 1 November, 2006
reasoned order only on sympathy or sentiments.
(See Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Ram Lal, State of
Bihar v. Amrendra Kumar Mishra; SBI v.
Mahatma Mishra; State of Karnataka v.
Amreerbi; State of M.P. v. Sanjay Kumar Pathak
and Urrar Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd., v.
Surji Devi.).
State Of M.P. & Ors vs Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Ors on 10 October, 2007
reasoned order only on sympathy or sentiments.
(See Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Ram Lal, State of
Bihar v. Amrendra Kumar Mishra; SBI v.
Mahatma Mishra; State of Karnataka v.
Amreerbi; State of M.P. v. Sanjay Kumar Pathak
and Urrar Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd., v.
Surji Devi.).
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & ... vs Surji Devi on 22 January, 2008
reasoned order only on sympathy or sentiments.
(See Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Ram Lal, State of
Bihar v. Amrendra Kumar Mishra; SBI v.
Mahatma Mishra; State of Karnataka v.
Amreerbi; State of M.P. v. Sanjay Kumar Pathak
and Urrar Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd., v.
Surji Devi.).
Chennai Metropolitan Water ... vs T.T. Murali Babu on 10 February, 2014
14. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of
proportionaility of punishment in CHENNAI
METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE
BOARD AND OTHERS v/s T.T.MURALI BABU
reported in (2014) 4 SCC 108 has observed that
proportionality or substitution of punishment would
come into play, if the Court on the analysis of material
brought on record comes to the conclusion that the
punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority or
Appellate Authority shocks the conscience of the Court.