Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)Angad Das vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 February, 2010
29. The precedent of Angad Das (supra) relied upon by the petitioner
is distinguishable. In the said matter, the request letter of the employee
for re-employment was treated as an appeal by the DIG Police, CRPF,
Avadi, Madras and the punishment of "compulsory retirement" as
awarded by the Commandant, 51 BN, CRPF, was enhanced to that of
"removal from service" w.e.f. 31.5.1996. It was observed by the Apex
Court that there is no provision of law which permits the DIG to treat a
letter of request for re-employment as an appeal, therefore, the order of
compulsory retirement was restored.
District Collector And Chairman ... vs M. Tripura Sundari Devi on 20 April, 1990
2. A question has now arisen as to whether a
Government servant can be discharged from service where it is
discovered later that the Government servant was not qualified or
eligible for his initial recruitment in service. The Supreme Court
in its judgment in the District Collector, Vizianagram Vs. M.
Tripura Sundari Devi [1990(4) SLR 237] went into this issue and
observed as under: --
V. Ramana vs A.P.S.R.T.C. & Ors on 5 September, 2005
The Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949
1