Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.56 seconds)Union Of India And Ors vs Sri Janardhan Debanath And Anr on 13 February, 2004
11. Thus, per se, the action resorted to in shifting the employee from
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.10 of 15
W.P.No.10465 of 2024
the seat to facilitate fair and free enquiry cannot be found fault with. As a
matter of fact in the case of Janardhan Debanath's case (cited supra)
the use of the word "undesirable" in the transfer order is held to be not
stigmatic.
Somesh Tiwari vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 December, 2008
7. The learned counsel in respect of her submission relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Somesh
Tiwari Vs Union of India and others reported in [(2009) 2 SCC
592] more specifically relied at paragraph No.16 for the proposition that if
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.5 of 15
W.P.No.10465 of 2024
there is malice in law, the Court can interfere.
Nirmala J. Jhala vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 18 March, 2013
The learned counsel further
relied upon another judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case
of Nirmala J.Jhala Vs State of Gujarat and another reported
in [2013 4SCC 301], more specifically paragraphs Nos.42 & 43 to contend that
the preliminary enquiry should also be on some basis and unless some
preliminary findings are recorded in enquiry, on a basis of a mere inspection, in
a spur of the moment allegations cannot be levelled against the petitioner. She
further submitted that the Court has to consider the allegation in the wake of
the period of service of the petitioner at the Central Prison, Puzhal, which is
only from 26 December, 2023.
Chief Engineer (Personnel) Tneb, ... vs K. Raman on 4 April, 1984
The learned Additional Government Pleader
further relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Registrar,
High Court Vs. Vasudevan and also in another case in A.K in Chief
Engineer (Personnel) TNEB, Madras Vs K.Raman [(1985) I
LLJ 164 MAD] to contend that in the nature of the allegations, resorting to
transfer would not be punitive but only in the public interest based on
administrative exigencies.
Jagdish Mitter vs Union Of India on 20 September, 1963
12. That brings us to the other question as to
whether the use of the expression "undesirable" warranted
an enquiry before the transfer. Strong reliance was placed
by learned counsel for the respondents on a decision of this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.9 of 15
W.P.No.10465 of 2024
Court in Jagdish Mitter Vs Union of India [AIR 1964 SC
449] (AIR P.456, para 21) to contend that whenever there is
a use of the word "undesirable" it casts a stigma and it
cannot be done without holding a regular enquiry. The
submission is clearly without substance. The said case
relates to use of the expression "undesirable" in an order
affecting the continuance in service by way of discharge.
1