Sufficiency of evidence, postulates existence of some evidence which links the charged officer with the misconduct alleged against him. Evidence, however, voluminous it may be, which is neither relevant in abroad sense nor establishes any nexus between the alleged misconduct and the charged officer, is no evidence in law. The mere fact that the enquiry officer has noted in his report, 'in view of oral, documentary and circumstantial evidence as adduced in the enquiry', would not in principle satisfy the rule of sufficiently of evidence, Sher Bahadur v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 3030 (3031): (2002) 7 SCC 142. [Railway Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966, R. 3(1)(i)(ii) & (iii) Railway Servants (D&A) Rules, 1968 R. 6(vii) to (ix)]
View Judgments Citing this Phrase