Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.32 seconds)
Nitish Kumar vs Chairman Railway Recruitment Board on 2 December, 2021 cites

Union Of India And Another vs Tulsiram Patel And Others on 11 July, 1985

16. We agree that an enquiry at the level of Appellate Authority as prescribed under the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in Tulsiram Patel case would redress the applicants' grievance of being denied natural justice and provide them opportunity to present their case. But, this would not address the issue of discrimination which the applicants are facing. Further, it would not be in the interest of justice to let go the arbitrary use of the provisions of Rule 14(ii) of the RS(D&A) Rules by the Disciplinary authority. It appears that the impugned order(s) were passed with caprice and without rationale and thus are liable to be set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 138 - Cited by 1450 - D P Madon - Full Document

H.S. Rangaramu vs The Management Of Karnataka State Road ... on 28 May, 2002

4.3. On the point of exhausting available legal remedies, the applicants pleaded (Para 6 of OA) that OA was filed as immediate interim relief was required. The impugned order was passed under Rule 14 (ii) of the RS (D&A) without mentioning any fact as to why it was reasonably not practicable to hold regular enquiry, hence the order was ex facie illegal. Filing an Appeal before the competent authority would have only delayed the redressal of their suffering and grievances whereas they needed immediate interim relief. The applicant(s) put reliance on the order of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in H. S. Rangaramu Vs The Management of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (WP No. 4524 of 2002
Karnataka High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Govt. Of A.P. And Ors vs J.Sridevi And Ors on 12 April, 2002

5. The respondents raised preliminary objection to the OA on the ground of maintainability as the applicants had not exhausted the available remedy of Appeal and Revision under Rule 22 and Rule 25 of RS(D&A) Rules, 1968. They averred that the OA was not tenable under Section 20 of the AT Act. The respondents referred to Hon'ble Supreme Court order in Govt. of A.P.& Others Vs Sridevi & Others reported in (2202) 5 SCC 37, order of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of HCL Infosys Ltd Vs State of Rajasthan and the order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of R K Singh Vs Union of India. The Page No. 11 respondents averred that Rule 22 of RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 provides wide scope to the appellate authority.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 20 - K G Balakrishnan - Full Document

R.K. Singh vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 23 April, 1999

13. The ground mentioned by the Disciplinary Authority to dispense with the regular departmental enquiry is that "the applicant may indulge in malpractice/impersonator to disturb working environment." The DoP&T guideline dated 11.11.1985 issued in the wake of the judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Tulsiram Patel (supra) and Satyvir Singh (supra) states the following at Para 6.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 22 - S P Bharucha - Full Document

Satyavir Singh And Others vs Union Of India And Others Etc. Etc on 12 September, 1985

In the wake of Apex Court judgement in Tulsiram Patel case (supra) and Satyavir Singh Case (supra) ,the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India issued an OM dated 11th November 1985 clarifying the issues arising from the judgements in the two cases. Railway Board circulated this DoPT OM vide their letter dated 06.02.1986. The Rule 14(ii) of the RS(D&A) Rules is analogous to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India providing special procedure for imposition of penalties in situations where it is not practically possible to hold an inquiry. Learned counsel averred that the applicants could claim in Appeal that an inquiry should be held with respect to the charges on which the penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed upon them.
Supreme Court of India Cites 49 - Cited by 106 - D P Madon - Full Document
1