Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.26 seconds)Union Of India vs H. C. Goel on 30 August, 1963
(ii) In the case of H.C. Goel (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that
suspicion cannot be treated as evidence. It has also been held that mere suspicion
should not be allowed to take the place of proof even in domestic enquiry. It may be
that the technical rules which govern criminal trial in courts may not necessarily
apply to disciplinary proceeding, but nevertheless, the principle that in punishing
the guilty scrupulous care must be taken to see that the innocent are not punished,
applies as much to regular criminal trials as to disciplinary enquiries held under the
statutory rules.
Roop Singh Negi vs Punjab National Bank & Ors on 19 December, 2008
(iii) In Roop Singh Negi (supra) case in para 17, Hon'ble Supreme Court
has held as under:-
Ministry Of Finance & Anr vs S.B. Ramesh on 2 February, 1998
(vi) In Rajesh Kumar Tiwari (supra) case, this Tribunal has also relied
upon S.B Ramesh (supra) case and has held that provision of Rule 14 (18) of CCS
(CCA) Rules, 1965 is mandatory.
Union Of India & Anr. vs D.S.Manchanda on 10 March, 2011
(v) In D.S. Manchanda (supra) case also, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi relying on
S.B. Ramesh (supra) case has held the Rule 14 (18) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 to be
mandatory.
Arun Kumar Yadav C I S F No. 034340426 vs The Union Of India And Ors on 13 December, 2021
(i) In Arun Gupta (supra), Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) has
held that power of the Tribunal to go into the facts of the case is not restricted if for
just decision of the case circumstances necessitated so.
Ravi Kumar Tiwari vs The Union Of India And Ors on 28 June, 2023
(vi) In Rajesh Kumar Tiwari (supra) case, this Tribunal has also relied
upon S.B Ramesh (supra) case and has held that provision of Rule 14 (18) of CCS
(CCA) Rules, 1965 is mandatory.
Subal Makhal vs Indian Red Cross Society & Ors on 22 September, 2016
(vii) In Indian Red Cross Society and others (supra) Hon'ble Calcutta High
Court in para 11 has held as under:- "11. The prosecution suspected the petitioner's
conduct. But the suspicion cannot, in law, be treated as evidence against the
1