Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1961)ILLJ569AP
ORDERP. Chandra Reddi, C.J.1. The petitioner seeks the removal of an order of dismissal passed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on certiorari.2. The material facts giving rise to the writ petition are capable of a concise statement. The petitioner Joined the Hyderabad Revenue Service in 1940 and from 1948 onwards he had been holding the posts of the category of District Collector. In 1956, he was appointed the Deputy Secretary to Government in the Public Works Department, while so, on the basis of a report submitted by the X Branch, OLD., in respect of certain allegations of corruption and other misconduct, the Government of Andhra Pradesh referred the matter to the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings under Section 4 of the Hyderabad Public Servants (Tribunal of Inquiry) Act, 1950 (XXIII of 1950) (hereinafter will be referred to as the Act for convenience).2. As many as nineteen charges of corruption were framed against him by the Tribunal and the petitioner was called upon to fur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1986(2)WLN482
Suresh Chandra Agrawal, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, Ravindra Nath, has assailed the order (Ex. 46) dated 16th March, 1984 passed by the Governor of Rajasthan where by the petitioner has been dismissed from service by way of punishment for misconduct.2. The petitioner was a member of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service (RFDS). During the period from October, 1980 to February, 1981 he was posted as District & Sessions Judge, Merta. A complaint was made by one Jorawarmal against the petitioner and on the said complaint a preliminary inquiry was conducted by M.C. Jain, J. After the said preliminary inquiry it was decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and the petitioner was suspended by order (Ex 2) dated 2nd December, 1981. The Chief Justice nominated Dr. K.S. Sidhu J. as the disciplinary authority to hold the inquiry and the disciplinary authority issued a memorandum (Ex. 3) dated 29th January, 1982 to the petitioner whereby the petitioner w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1951CriLJ950
Falshaw, J1. Lala Jagat Narain has been called on. as Editor, Printer & Publisher of an Urdu daily newspaper published at Jullundur called 'The Hind Samachar' to show cause why he should not be punished Under Section 3, Contempt of Courts Act, of 1926 with regard to a leading article which -appeared over his name in the issue of the paper dated 12-3-19.2. The petnr. in the case is Sardar Kapur Singh, I. C. S. against whom an inquiry has been in progress for several months under the Public Servants Innquiries Act XXXVII (37) of 1850. It so happens that the person who has been appointed by the Govt. as the Comr. under the Act to hold this inquiry is my Lord the Chief Justice of this Ct. The passage in the article in Question which is complained against by Sardar Kapur Singh has been translated in the petn. as follows: 'I have to ask one straight question from Doctor Bhargava, Can he point out any Dept. from which work can be taken without bribery? Is he not aware that, when he was opposi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
P.P. Naolekar, C.J. 1. The relevant facts necessary for adjudication of the issues involved in this case are, that the petitioner was temporary appointed as officiating LDC in the scale of pay of Rs. 260-400 p.m. vide order dated 15.4.1978. The petitioner was absorbed in regular vacancy of LDC with effect from 5.5.1978 and thereafter, he was confirmed against a permanent post of LDC with effect from 1.5.1982 vide order dated 11.3.1983. The petitioner was put under suspension in contemplation of the departmental enquiry vide order dated 18.2.1986. The petitioner was served with a charge sheet on 14.5.1986 wherein the petitioner was charged for absenting himself from duty without taking prior permission and that he had failed to maintain the account in respect of sale proceed properly and had misappropriated a sum of Rs. 3,84,862 being supply of sale proceed Biate Group Centre, and lastly, while functioning as LDC he had spent Rs. 7000 being supply of sale proceed of Biate Group Centre ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1986Guj209; (1986)1GLR1
ORDER1-2. x x x x 3. The questions referred for consideration of the larger bench are whether the Labour Courts under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act and the Industrial Disputes Act and Industrial Courts under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act and Industrial Tribunals under the Industrial Disputes Act are Courts and Courts subordinate to the High Court in terms of S. 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, and whether the Board of Nominees functioning under S. 96 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 as well as the Co-operative Tribunals constituted under the said Act are courts and courts subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 4. In order to answer the aforesaid questions, it will be necessary to have a look at the relevant statutory provisions holding the field.11. Statutory provisions :- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 defines contempt of courts ~s per section 2 of the said Act. Civil contempt is defined by section ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1954All235
Agrwala, J. 1. Shyam Lal, applicant, was a member of the Indian Service of Engineers occupying the post of the Superintending Engineer, VI Circle in the Irrigation Department of the State ot Uttar Pradesh. He was promoted to the rank of Superintending Engineer in August 1944 and was holding that post when the dispute in the case, that calls for decision, arose. The applicant passed his Civil Engineering Examination from the Thomason College, Roorkee, in 1922 standing first in his class. He was awarded the Council of India Prize of Rs. 1,000/- for being the best student of the year and a prize of Rs. 250/- for being the best Indian student of the year. He was also awarded the Cautley Gold Medal for the best Engineering design of the year. He was appointed in the Indian Service of Engineers in October 1923 by the Secretary of State for India in Council.At the time of his appointment the applicant was given a letter of appointment by the Secretary of State for India in Council which presc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1494; 1968(16)BLJR1; 1967CriLJ1380a; [1967]3SCR163
Mitter, J.1. This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court at Patna under Art. 134(1)(c) of the Constitution is directed against the judgment and order of that court dated December 14, 1964 in Criminal Miscellaneous Appeal No. 6 of 1964 whereby the appellant was found guilty of contempt of court, i.e., of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sitamarhi Circle, exercising the powers of the Register, Co-operative Societies, Bihar under s. 48 of the Bihar and Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1935. 2. The three questions which were argued before us in this appeal were :- (1) Whether the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies was a court within the meaning of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952; (2) Even if it was a Court, whether it was a court subordinate to the Patna High Court and (3) whether the words used by the appellant in one of his grounds of appeal to the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, which formed the basis of the complaint, did amount to cont...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1958P& H141; 1958CriLJ673
A.N. Bhandari, C.J.1. By this petition under Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the petitioner prays that S. Par-tap Singh Kairon, Chief Minister, Punjab, should be committed for contempt of court for interfering with a judicial enquiry pending before a Magistrate of the 1st class at Karnal.2. The petitioner is one Piara Singh, a resident of the Karnal district. He states that on 7-7-1957 a brutal murder was committed in village Rukhsana of the Karnal district in which Hazara Singh and Piara Singh sons of one Kirpa Singh were among the culprits. As this murder was one in a chain of murders committed by the gang of Hazara Singh in the Karnal district, the authorities concerned were deeply perturbed and had warrants of arrest issued against the culprits on 12-7-1957. While the police were looking for the perpetrators of the crime in all likely places the badmashes who are known to the Chief Minister went and took shelter under his roof. On 14-7-1957 Shri Asa Singh, Secretary to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1972Ori243; 38(1972)CLT498
Misra, C.J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a constable on 17-9-1962. He was made permanent after undergoing training in the Police Training College, Angul. By Annexure A dated 9-5-1964 the Superintendent of Police, Kalahandi, framed the following two charges against the petitioner.'1. He absented from duty from 12-2-1964 A.M. to 19-2-1964 A.M. without any leave or permission. 2. That he proceeded on four days C.L. with effect from 21-2-1964 P.M. and though he was warned against overstayal he overstayed C. L, by 3 days without leave or permission and returned to duty on 28-2-1964 P. M.'2. After regular enquiry the Superintendent of Police, Kalahandi, found the petitioner guilty and imposed the following penalty by his order (Annexure B) dated 10-7-1964:'The period of absence from 12-2-1964 to 18-2-1964 and 26-2-1964 to 28-2 1964 is treated as E. O. L. Since he has already suffered financial loss and mental agony I award him a lenient sentence i.e. a severe censure'.3. On 4-2-1966 the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1975Bom143; (1974)76BOMLR455; 1974MhLJ698
Tulzapurkar, J. 1. The question that has been referred to us for our decision by the Division Bench is as follows:'Whether the Officers on Special Duty appointed under the Maharashtra Government Notifications dated 11th March, 1969 are Courts within the meaning of the Contemplated of Courts Act, while discharging their duties under the Act'.2. The question arises in these circumstances: Respondent No. 3 Kumbhi Kasari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. is a Co-operative Sugar Factory of which the petitioners and respondents Nos. 4 to 16 are the members. Triennial election to the Board of Directors of respondent No. 3 was held on 18-11-1970 under the Election Rules framed in that behalf at which two of the petitioners and respondents Nos. 4 to 14 were the contesting candidates. The result of that election was declared on 19-11-1970 in the General Body Meeting of respondent No. 3 held on the date and respondents Nos. 4 to 13 held on that date and respondents Nos. 4 to 13 were declared elected ...
Tag this Judgment!