SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(SC) 316

S. M. SIKRI, C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, G. K. MITTER, I. D. DUA, P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Ram Kishan – Respondent


Advocates:
D.D.SHARMA, N.D.BALI, R.N.SACH

Judgment

SIKRI, CJI.:- The respondent Ram Kishan, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff, a Foot Constable, filed a suit in the Court of Sub Judge Ist Class, Delhi, challenging his dismissal from service by an order dated 25th October, 1960. This order was passed by Shri M. K. Saxena, Superintendent of Police (Traffic), Delhi. It was alleged by the plaintiff that this order was bad and illegal on various grounds. Two grounds may be mentioned here: (1) That Shri M. K. Saxena, Superintendent of Police( traffic). Delhi was not a District Superintendent of Police; (2) That the mandatory provisions of Punjab Police Rule 16.38 had been violated inasmuch as no information was given to the District Magistrate as laid down in the Punjab Police Rule 16.38 (1) and the District Magistrate never decided whether the preliminary investigation was to be conducted by the police or by a selected Magistrate 1st Class. It was further alleged that even the provisions of sub-Rule (2) of Rule 16.38 were not observed. The learned Sub-Judge decreed the suit and gave a declaration that the dismissal of the plaintiff was void. A decree for Rs. 1151/- was passed in favour of the Foot Constable. Among other i
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top