Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
..... of his promotion; (iii) recovery from his pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused by him to government, by negligence or breach of orders; (iv) withholding of increments of pay; (v) reduction to a lower stage in the time-scale of pay for a specified period, with further directions as to whether or not the government servant will earn increments of pay during the period of such reduction and whether on the expiry of such period, the reduction will or will not have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay ..... . bedre, learned advocate appearing for the corporation, on a pertinent query with regard to rule 5(1)(iii), reproduced above, submits that since the district collector conducted an enquiry and arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner, while performing his duty of demolishing a dilapidated house in which the tenant shri pargaonkar was staying, had caused a loss to the tenant, which can be computed in terms of money, which is rs.15,000/- ..... (2) whenever the disciplinary authority is of the opinion that there are grounds for inquiring into the truth of any imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour against a government servant it may itself inquire into, or appoint under this rule or under the provisions of the public servants (inquiries) act, 1850, as the case may be, an authority to inquire into the truth thereof. .....
Tag this Judgment!