Advanced Search Results

Chanchal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Rules - Rule 142 and 142(2); ;Border Security Force Act - Sections 18(1) and 80

Reported in : 2003(3)JKJ381

dismissed from service vide the impugned order dated 18.11.1999. This punishment was imposed under section 18(1) of the Border Security Force Act 1968. As far as the commission of offence under Section 376/452 RPC is concerned, the authority i. e. the

B.V. Ramnarayan Vs. State Bank of India, Hyderabad and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : State Bank of India (Supervising Staff) Service Rules - Rule 92; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 11(2)

Reported in : 1996(4)ALT753; (1997)ILLJ1007AP

in the Border Security Force was dismissed from service by the Commandant acting under Section 11(2) of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 on the ground that he was a deserter, without holding enquiry. Before the Supreme Court, the questions were … issued a Memo which reads : 'State Bank of India, Sri B. V. Ram NarayanRegion - V (Staff), 18, Viman Nagar,Regional Office, Balamrai,Hyderabad. Secunderabad-3Memo No. 004728 dated June 27, 1987 UNAUTHORISED ABSENCE FROM DUTY It is observed

P.R. Sumiyon Vijayraj Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force (Tenure and Posting and Deputation) Rules, 2002 - Rules 4, 14, 18 and 19; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 48 and 53; Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 - Rule 19; Border Security Force (Tenure of Posting and Deputation) (Amendment) Rules, 2002 - Rule 19

one ground stating that there was a clear violation of provision of law particularly Rule 14 of the Border Security Force (Tenure and Posting and Deputation) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules',)3. Mr. Choudhury, learned senior counsel in … a incident of service and impugned transfer did not attract any punitive action as contemplated under the Boarder Security Force Act, 1968 (for short, the Act), this transfer cannot be said to be punitive one. The petitioner has only been … actions have been categorically and explicitly laid down in the Act itself. Sections 48 and 53 prescribe for major and minor punishment respectively and on

Comdt. Atul Kumar Singh Vs. Uoi and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Section 117(2); Constitution of India - Articles 226, 227

the finding and sentence of the Security Force Court in terms of the provisions of Section 107 of Border Security Force Act, 1968. 20. Aggrieved by the finding and sentence awarded by the Security Force Court which stood confirmed by the … to the post of Commandant in the year 2002. In the year 2005 he was attached with the 18th Bn. BSF which was deployed at Paniasagar sector, which we are informed is in the State of Tripura.

P.C. Pande Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Constitution

Reported in : 1978(11)WLN435

working as Accountant-cum-Cashier in that year The petitioner was prosecuted for misappropriating property under Section 30 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (47 of 1968)(hereinafter referred to as the Act'), during the year 1975-76. He was convicted by the General … Court's order dated 13-9-1977 The Inspector-General, Border Security Force (R & G), Jodhpur, vide his order date d 18-10-1977 confirmed the finding and sentence of the Court The Court was convened by an order of the Inspector

Const. Jaibir Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Rule 45; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 149, 120B

u/s 20(a) i.e. using criminal force to his superior (first charge) and Section 26 intoxication (second charge) of BORDER SECURITY FORCE Act 1968. All the three accused persons pleaded not guilty of 1st charge and guilty of 2nd charge, hence competent … 15:30 hours he found Const.B.A.Rao, Const.Chaudhary, Const.Dinesh and Const.Ram Niwas absent and once again found Const.B.A.Rao absent at 18:30 hours. He reported non-availability of Const.B.A.Rao since he was to be on duty and hence he replaced Const.Gangadhar

Sarjeet Singh Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

was to the following effect : ‘1. You hereby inform that under section 18(a) and 16(a) of BSF Act, 1968 initiation of disciplinary action has been fixed against you by Summary Security Force Court. Accordingly to Rule 157 … PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J.1. The writ petitioner challenges the order dated October 31, 2012 passed by Summary Security Force Court holding the petitioner guilty of the three charges framed against him and inflicting the punishment of dismissal … in 2011 and after completion of training, he was posted at Indo-Pak Border, Poonch Sector, Jammu & Kashmir. He was posted at E-Coy but as

D.D. Sharma (Ex. Asstt. Comdt.) Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 20

Reported in : 74(1998)DLT92; 1998(46)DRJ162

arbitrary. I, thereforee, do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same accordingly stands dismissed. Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Section 18 & 62--Termination--Desertion from service--Dismissal without pension--The delinquent absconding to avoid active duty and could not

Gurdip Singh Bath Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Service

had absented himself from duty without leave and therefore, had committed an offence unde Section 18 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968, (hereinafter referred to as 'the BSF Act') because he was declared a deserter. For such serious allegations as

Amresh Sharma vs.director General, Border Security Force

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

trial was held by the General Security Force Court (for short ‘G.S.F.C.’) established under Section 64 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (BSF Act). Two separate charge sheets were framed by the G.S.F.C. The first charge sheet was issued under … Section 46 of the Border Security Force Act.5. The petitioner filed a complaint with the BSF on June 18, 2009 alleging that Kailash Chand had deceitfully induced her to have conjugal relations with him by making her