Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (1.79 seconds)
N K Verma vs M/O Defence on 6 February, 2019 cites

Union Of India Etc. Etc vs K.V. Jankiraman Etc. Etc on 27 August, 1991

9. Learned counsel for the applicant, while reiterating the applicant's contentions as detailed above, emphasised that the reply of the respondents clearly admits that the chargesheet in the disciplinary proceedings in question was despatched to the applicant only on 04.05.2007, i.e. well after the DPC for the year 2007-2008 was held on 25.04.2007 and promotion orders subsequently issued on 30.04.2007. Citing a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Ors. vs. K.V.Jankiraman & Others, (1991) 4 SCC 109 where it has been held that the sealed cover procedure can be resorted to only when the chargesheet has been issued and further referring to the Apex Court's explanation in the case of Delhi Development Authority vs. H.C. Khurana, (1999) 5 SCC 762 where it has been held that the date of issue of the chargesheet would be the same as the date of despatch of chargesheet, learned counsel for the applicant argued that this proved beyond doubt that in the present case, the chargesheet was issued only on 04.05.2007, i.e. well after the passage of the disputed promotion orders on 30.04.2007.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1332 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Delhi Development Authority vs H.C. Khurana on 7 April, 1993

He pointed out that the respondents in their reply have also cited the case of Delhi Development Authority vs. H.C.Khurana, (supra), and thus have also acknowledged in effect that the despatch of the chargesheet and therefore its date of issue is indeed 04.05.2007. The applicant's counsel thus contended that when the DPC was convened on 25.04.2007, and the promotion orders were issued, excluding the applicant, on (OA No.255/2011) (11) 30.04.2007, no chargesheet had been issued to him in any disciplinary proceedings contrary to the claims made by the respondents in this regard in their reply and also vide Annexure A/3. He argued that in the circumstances, the provisions of Para 7 read with Para 2 of the DoP&T OM dated 14.09.1992, (Annexure R/2), would clearly not apply in the applicant's case and that therefore he should have been duly promoted to the post of Senior Accounts Officer on 30.04.2007 itself.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 131 - J S Verma - Full Document
1