Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC493; [1960]2SCR569
Shah, J.1. Sardar Kapur Singh (who will hereinafter be referred to as the appellant) was admitted by the Secretary of State for India in Council to the Indian Civil Service upon the result of a competitive examination held at Delhi in 1931. After a period of training in the United Kingdom, the appellant returned to India in November, 1933 and was posted as Assistant Commissioner, Ferozepore in the Province of Punjab. He served in the Province in various capacities between the years 1933 and 1947. In July, 1947, he was posted as Deputy Commissioner at Dharamsala and continued to hold that office till February 11, 1948, when he was transferred to Hoshiarpur at which place he continued to hold the office of Deputy Commissioner till a few days before April 14, 1949. On April 13, 1949, the appellant was served with an order passed by the Government of East Punjab suspending him from service. On May 5, 1950, the appellant submitted a representation to the President of India protesting agains...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1990)ILLJ205Mad
Mohan, J. 1. The petitioner is a direct recruit to the post of Deputy Collector-Category II, in the year 1978. He successfully completed his probation on 1st January 1981. He was promoted as District Revenue Officer-Category I of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service. He was posted as Joint Director of Stationery and Printing on 26th August 1986. He was sent on deputation to the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation and posted as Senior Regional Manager at Madras on 27th February, 1987. By proceedings dated 6th February, 1988, he was posted as District Revenue Officer at Chengalpattu. He joined the same on 8th February, 1988. On 12th March, 1988, Mr. Sameer Vyas was posted as Collector of Chengalpattu at Kancheepuram. 2. According to the petitioner, the said Collector, not being well acquainted with Tamil, seems to have misunderstood the petitioner which led to some misunderstanding. While the matter stood thus, to the surprise and shock of the petitioner, by G.O.Ms. No. 534, Public (Special-A)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC66; 1956CriLJ156; [1955]2SCR955
Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal with certificate under article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution arises out of an application under section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act (XXXII of 1952) and section 8 of the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act (XXXVII of 1850) read with article 227 of the Constitution filed by the respondent against the appellant in the High Court of Judicature of Patna and raises an important question as to whether the Commissioner appointed under Act XXXVII of 1850 is a Court. 2. The respondent is a Member of the Bihar Civil Service (Executive Branch). The State Government received reports to the effect that the respondent had been guilty of serious misconduct and corrupt practices in the discharge of his official duties while employed as Sub-Divisional Officer at Aurangabad and they accordingly decided that an inquiry into the truth of the various charges against him should be made under the provisions of the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 (Act XXXVII of 1850, hereinafte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC375; 1954CriLJ993; (1954)IMLJ702(SC); [1954]1SCR1150
Mukherjea, J.1. This is a petition under article 32 of the Constitution, praying for a writ, in the nature of certiorari, for calling up the records of certain criminal proceedings stated against the petitioner by the Special Judge, Sessions Court, Delhi, and for quashing the same on the ground that these proceedings are without jurisdiction, having been commenced in violation of the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under article 20(2) of the Constitution.2. The petitioner was a member of the Indian Civil Service and till lately was employed as Secretary to the Ministry of Commerce and Industries in the Government of India. Certain imputations of misbehavior by the petitioner, while holding offices of various descriptions under the Government of India, came to the notice of the Central Government of and the latter being satisfied that there were prima facie good grounds for making an enquiry directed a formal and public enquiry to be made as to the truth or falsity of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1585; [1965(10)FLR231]; (1965)ILLJ323SC; [1964]7SCR587
Gajendragadkar, C.J. 1. This petition which has been filed by the petitioner S. Gurdev Singh Sidhu under Art. 32 of the Constitution, challenges the validity of article 9.1 of the Pepsu Services Regulations, Volume I, as amended by the Governor of Punjab by the notification issued by him on the 19th January, 1960 in exercise of the powers conferred on him by the proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution and all other powers enabling him in that behalf. The petitioner's contention is that the said article contravenes the constitutional right guaranteed to the persons employed in civil capacities either under the Union or the State, by Art. 311. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Superintendent of Police in the erstwhile Patiala State by His Highness the Maharaja Adhiraj of Patiala on the 4th of February, 1942. The conditions of his service were governed by the Patiala State Service Regulations which had been issued by the Ruler of Patiala State who was at the relevant time the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. These appeals are directed against judgments dated 28.2.2008 and 4.2.2010 of the Full Bench and the Division Bench respectively of the Madras High Court whereby the appellant’s challenge to the order of the learned Single Judge was negatived and his dismissal from service was upheld.2. The appellant joined service under the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (for short, ‘the Commission’) as Junior Assistant w.e.f. 1.9.1973. While he was posted in ‘P’ Section of the Commission, which deals with the appointment of Invigilators and Chief Invigilators for various examinations, the Commission issued Notification dated 8.8.1989 for holding competitive examination for direct recruitment of Assistant Surgeons. The main written examination was conducted on 17.2.1990 and 18.2.1990. Shri Syed Abdul Kareem, who was appointed as Chief Invigilator at Bharathiar Government Arts College for Women, North Madras, examination centre, met the Superintende...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC160; 1955(0)KLT351(SC); (1956)ILLJ235SC; [1955]1SCR1011
Mehr Chand Mahajan, C.J.1. This appeal by leave of the High Court of Judicature of Travancore-Cochin at Ernakulam is directed against an order of a Full Bench of that Court dismissing an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Government of the united State of Travancore-Cochin removing the appellant from service of the State and permanently debarring him from reappointment in service.2. The facts giving rise to the petition and the appeal are these : The petitioner entered the service of erstwhile Travancore State in the year 1928. By promotion he became the Executive Engineer, Electricity Department in August 1937 and subsequently Electrical Engineer to Government in October 1944. He was the Electrical Engineer to Government on the 1st July 1949 when the States of Travancore and Cochin were integrated by a Covenant entered into between the rulers of the two States. By an order of the Government of the united State of Travancore-Cochin, dated the 11...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(2)ALT593
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by a dismissed judicial officer for a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the notification issued in G.O. Ms. No. 55 Law (LA & J, Cts. CI) Department dated 7.4.1999 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent herein, dismissing the petitioner from judicial service as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 311 of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction to the State Government and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the 2nd respondent herein, to accept the resignation submitted by the petitioner on 26.10.1996 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.2.The petitioner while serving as Subordinate Judge (now redesignated as Senior Civil Judge), Narasaraopet, was served with a charge memo dated 10.9.1997 by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, who was appointed as the Enquiry ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1711; (1963)ILLJ671SC; [1963]1SCR416
Mudholkar, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab High Court upon a certificate granted by it under Article 133(1)(a) of the constitution declaring that the case is fit for appeal to this Court. 2. The appellant was directly recruited as Tehsildar in the year 1936. According to him his work was found to be extremely satisfactory and for this reason he was appointed as an Extra Assistant Commissioner on probation in the year 1945. His appointment amounted to promotion to the Provincial Civil Service (Executive Branch) and was made by selection through the Punjab Public Services Commission. The notification pertaining to the appellant's promotion appears in the Gazette of June 5, 1949, and dates from May 31, 1945. 3. According to the appellant, throughout his career as a public servant he had been very honest, hard-working and impartial and was extremely popular with all committee such as Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. He also claims to have 'helped the pu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2008)1GLR595
S.R. Brahmbhatt, J.1. The petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the order dated 31/12/1990 dismissing the petitioner from services on the ground of defiance and disobeying the order of his superiors for performing internal securities at Bihar on 15/4/1989, on the ground that the impugned order is suffering from patent illegality and the same could not have been passed.2. Brief facts deserves to be set out in order to appreciate the controversy as under.The petitioner was appointed as Police Constable in State Reserve Police Force in the year 1981. The petitioner was required to proceed to Bihar for discharging his duties in respect of internal securities in Bihar. The petitioner was informed by his superiors on 14/4/1989 that he and others will have to proceed for discharging their duties in Bihar as their terms of attachment had been over. The said orders were repeated in the morning parade of 7.00 'O' clock and the Rear Commander had ordered them to...
Tag this Judgment!