Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1967Mad281
(1) These appeals are directed against the order of Srinivasan J. in W.P. 123 and 124 of 1961 in which the prayers were for the issue of a writ of certiorari and consequent writ of mandamus respectively. The prior facts required for a consideration of these two appeals are briefly the following:The appellant Mrs. Nesamoney Daniel was employed as a teacher in the Government aided Primary School, Pannimade estate, Annamalais. Under the rules issued by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, the appellant in her capacity as a teacher of a primary school, was obliged to take an insurance policy on her life. As instructed by the Life Insurance Corporation, she presented herself for medical examination, to one Dr. K.V. Mathai, M.B.B.S. the third respondent in the two writ petitions, who was at that time employed by the estate, in which the teacher was also employed. Sometime later, she received a communication from the Life Insurance Corporation stating that the report of the third respondent show...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 119(2005)DLT72; 2005(81)DRJ124; 2006(1)SLJ261(Delhi)
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. In this Writ Petition it has been prayed that the Order dated 24.6.2002 imposing punishment of forfeiture of one increment with cumulative effect as well as the transfer of the Petitioner from the National Headquarters to Arakonam, Tamil Nadu be quashed; the Order dated 3.9.2000 terminating the services of the Petitioner be quashed and the Petitioner be reinstated with all consequential benefits.2. The first incident which has been narrated in the petition and relied upon pertains to the Respondent's Memorandum dated 15.5.2002, bringing to the notice of the Petitioner that he had been 'arrogant and indecent', and 'rude and defiant' in his behavior to his superior, Colonel A.S. Budhiraja. Thereafter, by Memorandum dated 30.5.2002 other alleged misconducts were brought within the scope of the Inquiry. In my view it would be superfluous to go into the details for the reason that the Petitioner has admitted all these charges, attributing his misbehavior to mental strai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1963Ker92
C.A. Vaidialingam, J,1. In this writ petition Mr. T. N. Subramania Iyer, learned counsel for the petitioner, challenges the proceedings taken by the State Government, and which ultimately resulted in the passing of the order, Ext. P-8, by the respondent on 20-6-1961. Under Ext. P-8, it will be seen that the State Government are of the view that, misbehaviour as against the petitioner, has been proved and that he is dismissed from service with effect from 13-2-1961, the date on which he was placed under suspension, pending enquiry into the charges framed as against him.2. The petitioner joined as a clerk in the Land Revenue Department in 1107 and he was occupying various positions after that period and ultimately in 1955, he was promoted and posted as Sub-Magistrate, Irinjalakuda. On 6-10-1956, the Bar Association, Irinjalakuda, passed a resolution alleging serious misconduct as against the petitioner and requesting for action being taken as against him. On a copy of the resolution bein...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1996Cal28,100CWN197
ORDER1. The petitioner in this application have, inter alia, questioned a notification dated 4-2-1994 issued by the Central Government in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 24(1) of the Mines Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.The petitioner No. 1 is an Association of Officers of Coal Industries and the petitioner No. 2 is the General Secretary of the petitioner No. 1. The other petitioners are Officers of the New Kenda Colliery belonging to Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. An accident occurred in the said New Kenda Colliery as a result whereof 55 lives were lost on 25-1-1994. The impugned notification reads thus:--'Whereas an accident took place on 25th January, 1994 at New Kenda Colliery of Eastern Coal Fields, situate at Burdwan District in the State of West Bengal as result of which there has been loss of lives and properties. And whereas it is the opinion of the Central Government that there must...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (2001)2CALLT518(HC)
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. As identical notices have been issued by the Enquiry Officer in relation to a charge sheet issued by the same disciplinary authority levelling identical charges against the respective petitioners in the above three writ petitions and are subject matter of challenge. The three writ petitions have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common Judgment and order.2. For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P. No. 8131 (W) of 1996 have been noticed in this Judgment and order. The facts in the other two writ petitions being identical.3. The petitioner while working as Constable under Railway Protection Force was proceeded with departmentally and a charge sheet was issued. The charge and the imputation levelled against the petitioner read as under;'Cons/8103 Uma Kant of RPF Post/Andal (P) is charged for active connivance in a theft case of sugar from Rly. Wagons in that- On 6-1-93 white he along with Nk/1508 R.N. Singh, Cons/8980 K. Nath and Cons/3924 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [2008(118)FLR207]
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Manik Mohan Sarkar, JJ.1. This application is against the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 22nd March, 2005, whereby and whereunder the application of the respondent' employee has been allowed, setting aside the order of dismissal from services.2. The facts leading to filing of this case is as follows:3. On of about 21st August, 1986, the respondent-employee, then Assistant Goods Clerk had been in the employment of Eastern Railway, then posted at Farakka N.T.F.C. siding, was charge-sheeted on various imputation of misconduct,4. We find as many as four different imputation of misconduct which include permanent and temporary misappropriation of fund and further not properly accounting for the demurrage charges and not showing in the balance sheet accrual of such demurrage charges and manipulation etc.5. The delinquent employee replied to the said charges. Thereafter, enquiry followed by appointing enquiry officer. There is no dispute that the emp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(6)ALD18; 2001(5)ALT543
S.B. Sinha, C.J. 1. Constitutionality of Rule 153(8) of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') is in question in this appeal. 2. The appellant herein who was appointed as Sub-Inspector in the Railway Protection Force and subsequently was promoted as Inspector, was placed under suspension on 18-9-1995 on the allegation that he made excess delivery of scrapworth about Rs.10,000/-. A departmental proceeding has been initiated against him wherein he seeks to engage a friend to defend his case. 3. The Parliament enacted the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to provide for the constitution and regulation of an armed force of the Union for the better protection and security of railway property and for matters connected therewith. Section 21 of the said Act provides for the rule making power inter alia for regulating the punishments and prescribing authorities to whom appeal shall be preferred from orders of pun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2006(2)JKJ280
R.C. Gandhi, J.1. Petitioner seeks issuance of writ of Certiorari to quash Government Order No. 166-F of 2001 dated 11.07.2001 whereby his services have been terminated. He also seeks to quash the enquiry report No. CDI/53/95 (FD) dated 08.01.1999. He seeks further writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to re-instate the petitioner as Accounts Officer with all consequential service benefits and treat the period of suspension and after the termination till date as on duty.2. Petitioner, while posted as Treasury Officer, Thathri has made drawls of his TA claims, Medical reimbursement and also allowed the drawals presented to him by Drawing and Disbursing Officer. It came to the notice of respondents that petitioner has misappropriated the amount while working as Treasury Officer. Preliminary enquiry was held and on the basis of that enquiry, communication dated 6.2.1995 was issued to the petitioner by the Director Accounts and Treasuries, Jammu, indicating there in that petitioner h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1961KAR84; (1961)ILLJ479Kant
S.R. Das Gupta, C.J. 1. The question, which has been referred to us for decision, shortly stated, arises as follows. 2. The petitioner was directly recruited as an upper division clerk. His first appointment was as junior assistant, Political Department. On 18 September 1943 he was transferred on deputation of the Rationing Department, which was a temporary department. In that department he rose up to the position of a Rationing Officer and was drawing a sum of Rs. 460. On 1 March, 1954 the Rationing Department which, as I said, was a temporary department, ceased to exist and the petitioner was thereupon reverted to his parent department. Instead of being reposted to the Political Department he was first posted to the Labour Department and then to the Public Works Department. The pay which was fixed on such reversion was Rs. 120. The petitioner's case is that when he went on deputation on 18 September, 1943 he was confirmed in the post of junior assistant on a pay of Rs. 120 in the gra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1961Kant247; AIR1961Mys247
Somnath Iyer, J. 1. Respondents 3 and 4 who were Excise Assistant Inspectors in the service of the new State of Mysore were promoted as Excise Inspectors in December, 1958. The petitioner who is an Excise Assistant Inspector of that State seeks their removal by quo-warrantor from their posts and his own appointment by mandamus to one of them. He applies for a further direction that, after his appointment in that way, he should be placed, in the list of seniority, above respondent 5, who, although appointed as Excise Inspector in December, 1957, is, according to him, is junior in the service of the State.2. The dates on which these four persons entered the service of the former State of Mysore and those on which they were promoted as Excise Assistant Inspectors arc set out in the following tabular statement:--NameRank inthe provisional Inter-State Seniority list.Date of employment. Date ofpromotion as Excise Assistant InspectorRudraradhya(Petitioner)1213-7-194514-9-1949Chikkarangiah(Res...
Tag this Judgment!