Maharashtra Departmental Inquiries Enforcement Of Attendance Of Witnesses And Production Of Documents Act 1986 - Judgment Search Results

Govt of Nct of Delhi and ors Through Commissioner Trade and Taxes. Vs ...

Court : Delhi

..... agreed with the aforesaid reasons in view of the departmental inquiries enforcement of attendance of witnesses and production of documents act 1972 which permits the disciplinary authority or the enquiry ..... ltd 2005 7 scc 764 5 director town planning maharashtra anr bhalchandra v kukkarni 2006 5 scc 464 6 romesh ..... 1991 supreme court 1043ii satyavir singh v uoi 1986 scc l s 1 iii jagdish v uoi o a dated .....

R. Shamanna Vs. the State Bank of Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2003KAR4467

natural justice c constitution of india articles 226 and 227 departmental enquiry request made for summoning witnesses duty of enquiry officer lawyer with the bank s permission had adversely affected the interest of the petitioner further he submits that disciplinary authority was an attempt must be made by him to secure the attendance of the witnesses even if the attempt is likely to does not have power to compel the presence of the witnesses the enquiry officer has suggested to the official concerned that be said to have vitiated on account of such non production of witnesses but i hasten to add that the management did not take the stand that the copies of the documents which the petitioner is seeking is either irrelevant or has of officers association of which he is a member this action the learned counsel characterises as one which is contrary to petitioner has retired from service in the month of march 1986 at this stage no useful purpose will be served in

Y.K. Singla Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 79(1999)DLT585

committed by anofficial the charge againstshri singla has been provedby departmental enquiry onthe basis of evidenceproduced there which aloneis material even made hereinbefore are reiterated it is further submitted that the inquiring authority did not commit any error of irregularity when he line to manage various aspects of the unit like technical financial and marketing etc the party has proposed to employ technically allegations in the charge sheet as well as list of witnesses were placed on the record of the enquiry proceedings by to the bank officer could not be denied by non production of documents further removal of the petitioner was not in impugned departmental proceedings for example detail of some of such documents which have been unlawfully withheld by the respondents is respectfully of the evidence the tribunal fell into patent error and acted wholly beyond its jurisdiction the supreme court had referred to no hearing was givenbefore passing of ordersby the appellate authority 1986 sc 1173 to1182 para 24 eventhough shri singla hasspecifically requested

Shri Prakash S/O Shri Bhawani Prashad Vs. the State Govt. of Nct of De ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 137(2007)DLT119; 2009(93)DRJ288

and that decision is raosaheb balu killedar v state of maharashtra 1995 crilj 2632 the latter decision makes rather interesting reading then several hours had elapsed the complete lack of any interest at the earliest point of time to identify the assailants falsely the accused persons 3 the evidence of the injured witnesses is of great value to the prosecution and it cannot recover of murder weapon not associated by any witness non production of important witness during trial conviction set aside the main police did not collect signatures of independent persons in the documents made contemporaneous with such actions 59 in view of the action as unreliable to start with nor to jettison such action merely for the reason that police did not collect signatures 1986 and the accused was arrested only on 11 4 1986 nearly four days thereafter we find it extremely difficult to

KamruddIn Pathan Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Co.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1988(1)WLN82

court held as under if a superior officer holds a departmental enquiry in a very slipshod manner or even dishonestly the misconduct and it was thus not desirable in the public interest to continue him in service particularly after his conviction by interest of justice that defendants be asked to produce certain documents he therefore passed an order to that effect on march personally rajasthan state road transport service prevention of ticketless travel act 1975 section 8 and constitution of india articles 20 amp by additional civil judge no 2 ajmer dated may 31 1986 upholding the judgment and decree passed by the additional munsif

Gurucharan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1975WLN(UC)299

his discretion while functioning as the disciplinary authority in a departmental proceedings such functions could legitimately be discharged by a competent parte against the petitioner as the petitioner had failed to attend the enquiry proceedings on the aforesaid date moreover as i he was not at all serious in producing his defence witnesses and no fault can be found with the order passed making a grouse of denial of opportunity in respect of production of his evidence in defence which was not well founded his discretion or pleasure but he must be regarded as acting as a constitutional head exercising executive functions of the state of children rules 2007 rule 12 98 juvenile justice act 1986 section 2 h altamas kabir cyriac joseph jj determination as

Lakshmi Kant Pandey Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1984SC469; 1984(1)Crimes542(SC); 1984(1)SCALE159; (1984)2SCC244; [1984]2SCR795

adoption kuan yin charitable trust terre des homes india society maharashtra state women s council legal aid services west bengal sos and other particulars and send such list to the appropriate department of the government of each foreign country where indian children duly certificate by a medical doctor a declaration regarding their financial status alongwith supporting documents including employer s certificate where applicable to the welfare of the minor and to ensure his production in the court if and when so required by the country of the prospective adoptive parent secondly that the travel documents for the child can be obtained at the appropriate time regard to the orders made under the guardian and wards act 1890 entrusting care and custody of indian children to foreign

Murugan and anr. Vs. State Rep. by Public Prosecutor, Madras, Tamil Na ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2009SC72; RLW2009(1)SC544; 2008(13)SCALE117; 2008AIRSCW6948

a p 1971crilj422 bhim singh rup singh v state of maharashtra 1974crilj337 it has been said that to the principles laid the trial court which had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing their evidence could be reversed only for very court in its conduct of the appeal should and will act in accordance with rules and principles well known and recognised

Ajmer Municipal Committee Vs. Jethanand Wadhumal

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1956CriLJ165

case at once almost similar view was taken in excise department v magiah air 1951 hyd 54 d reliance on behalf complaint it will be most inconvenient to require his personal attendance but it is to obviate such difficulties that the proviso servant is absent the magistrate cannot refuse to examine other witnesses the case is different when the complaint is filed not already made an order calling for the documents for the production of which alone the application dated 14 10 1953 was through somebody the magistrate made an order calling for the documents and adjourning the case to 25 11 1953 for the which the opposite party was charged being under a special act the provisions of cr p c do not strictly apply of children rules 2007 rule 12 98 juvenile justice act 1986 section 2 h altamas kabir cyriac joseph jj determination as

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Amolak Chand Sanghi

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1982WLN633

and were rightly relied upon by enquiry officer at the departmental enquiry reliance can be placed on the previous statements given servant and the witness examined in his defence if the inquiring authority declines to examine any witness on the ground that laid down that the fact that the statements of the witnesses taken at the preliminary stage of the enquiry were used which he has relied whether it be another person particular documents or specific prior events h w r wade on administrative at important safeguard to ensure observance of the duty to act judicially it introduces clarity checks the introduction of extraneous or of children rules 2007 rule 12 98 juvenile justice act 1986 section 2 h altamas kabir cyriac joseph jj determination as