Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (1.70 seconds)
Shri Rajesh Kumar Saxena Retd. Chief ... vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Through, ... on 23 November, 2006 cites

D.V. Kapoor vs Union Of India And Ors on 7 August, 1990

In D.V. Kapoor v. Union of India and Ors. the Hon'ble the apex Court has held that a finding should be recorded either in departmental enquiry or judicial proceedings that the petitioner committed grave misconduct or negligence in the discharge of his duty while in office., subject of the charge. In the absence of such a finding the authority concerned cannot impose penalty of withholding pension as a measure of punishment either in whole or in part permanently or for a specified period or to order recovery of the pecuniary loss, in whole or in part from the pension of the concerned employee.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 185 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Dr. Balbir Singh And Ors. Etc. Etc vs Municipal Corporation, Delhi And Ors on 12 December, 1984

4. A Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Than Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi (1998 (1) Administrative Tribunal Judgments 66) has held that when till the date of petitioner's retirement disciplinary proceeding had not commenced, the respondent-authority thereafter ought not to have taken any disciplinary action against the petitioner and that the charge sheet was served even after more than one year of the petitioner's retirement, the respondent authority cannot take shelter behind the order stated to have been passed after two years of the petitioner's retirement on the assumption that the petitioner still continued to be in respondent's service, such disciplinary proceeding is non-est. In the said judgment the respondents were directed to work out and pay the amount of retiral benefits, including pension, provident fund, leave salary, group insurance, C.D.S. amount to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the writ order failing which the respondents were made liable to pay appropriate interest at the rate of 12% per annum.
Supreme Court of India Cites 31 - Cited by 195 - A P Sen - Full Document

Bangali Babu Misra vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 5 December, 2002

Further a Division Bench of our High Court in the case of Bangali Babu Misra v. State of U.P. and Ors. (2004 (2) Administrative total Judgments 63) has held that withholding of post retiral benefits may be gratuity, pension or other dues, after the retirement of a Government servant can be done only in accordance with any Rule and in absence of any such Rule or any such law, the post retiral dues cannot be withheld neither the pension can be stopped nor curtailed nor reduced. Therefore, the Division Bench allowed the writ petition by issuing a writ of mandamus upon the respondents to release the entire post retiral dues of the petitioner including gratuity, pension, commutation, leave encashment, Group Insurance etc.
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 20 - Full Document
1