Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 4398 (1.62 seconds)

Shri Manik Chand vs Union Of India on 15 April, 2011

which several officials including the Applicant were identified as alleged subsidiary offenders. Applicant was suspended vide order dated 20.10.2001 which was revoked vide Memo dated ... Shri Rajiv Aggarwal. The Applicant and many others were identified as subsidiary offenders. Out of 51 subsdiary offenders, it was submitted by Shri
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Hardik D Pandya vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dinesh Bachubhai Waghela vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to Bench learned counsel in all group of these
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gitaben S Modi vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

V A Solanki vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

K H Vaniya vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rajubhai J Thakor vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nareshkumar D Parmar vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Asha R Makwana vs Posts on 31 January, 2025

issued a detailed instructions and guidelines how the responsibility for subsidiary offender and the main offenders in case of miss appropriation of Government money ... vehemently argued that the applicant is chargesheeted Ahmedabad and penalized as subsidiary offender. According to learned counsel in all group of these OAs, the applicants
Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next