G.T.NANAVATI, S.C.AGRAWAL
Secretary To Government – Appellant
Versus
A. C. J. Britto – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Nanavati, J.-The respondent was appointed as a Sub-Inspector of Police in 1962. While posted at Madurai, a departmental action was initiated against him under Rule 3(b), of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and on being found guilty he was dismissed from service by an order dated 3.11.79. That order was set aside in appeal by the Inspector General of Police on the ground that in conducting the inquiry there was violation of the prescribed procedure. The enquiry officer was directed to proceed further with the inquiry from the stage it was found to be bad.
2. As the order of dismissal was set aside the respondent was reinstated in service. He was posted at Tiruchirapalli (Trichy) as Sub-Inspector Incharge of Vikkiramangaiam Police Station. He joined the duty at that Police Station on 12.11.80 and proceeded on casual leave from 13.11.80 to 19.11.80. Instead of resuming duty on 20.11.80 he applied for medical leave and thereafter went on extending it continuously till he was placed under suspension on 14.6.81. As he was remaining continuously absent on the ground of health, the Superintendent of Police, Tiruchirapalli by his memo dated 22.
Union of India v. Mohd. Ramzan Khan
Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar
A.L. Kalra v. Project and Equipment Corporation of India Ltd.
Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India & Ors.
Union of India & Ors. v. Giriraj Sharma
Inspector General of Police v. Thavasiappan. (1996) 2 SCC 145 : Relied on.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.