more than one point.
16. The petitioners contend that the general charging section is Section 3 of the Act which (as amended ... petitioners, Section 3-A of the Act artificially engrafts virtually a parallel charging section and leaves the applicability of the same to the sheer pleasure
other. One of the two procedures as envisaged by the appellants is charge-sheeting the employees and the other was the procedure prescribed under ... operating in different fields, it is difficult for us to accept that the respondent Company should not have followed the procedure of charge-sheeting
clear from the impugned order ex facie no formal charge has
been framed, nor explanation has been called for, nor an enquiry has been
conducted ... President. As seen from the impugned order, two lines run parallel to the
signature and one line runs below the signature of the President
clear from the impugned order ex facie no formal charge has been framed, nor explanation has been called for, nor an enquiry has been conducted ... President. As seen from the impugned order, two lines run parallel to the signature and one line runs below the signature of the President
B.C. Chaturvedi vs Union Of India And Ors on 1 November, 1995
Equivalent citations
Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India on 25 January, 1978
Equivalent citations: 1978 AIR 597
Central Inland Water ... vs Brojo Nath Ganguly & Anr on 6 April, 1986
Equivalent citations
Nikesh Tarachand Shah vs Union Of India on 23 November, 2017
Equivalent citations: AIR 2017
Delhi Transport Corporation vs D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress on 4 September, 1990
Equivalent citations
Union Of India And Ors vs Hindustan Development Corpn. And Ors on 15 April, 1993
