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

1992 Supreme(SC) 516

A.S.ANAND, KULDIP SINGH
R. M. Gurjar – Appellant
Versus
High Court Of Gujarat – Respondent


Advocates:
Anip Sachthey, P.C.KAPUR, RASHMI DHARIWAL, S.K.DHOLAKIA

JUDGMENT

KULDIP SINGH, J.:- R. M. Gurjar and D. N. Jadhav were working as junior clerks in the Civil Courts under the administrative control of District Judge, Broach, Gujarat. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against them on the charge that they falsely identified three persons before a Judicial Magistrate. At the enquiry both of them admitted the charge and prayed for mercy. The District Judge by the order dated June 5, 1974 imposed the penalty of withholding their future promotions with permanent effect. The High Court in exercise of its powers under Rule 23 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline And Appeal) Rules, 1971 (the Rules) enhanced the penalty and imposed the punishment of removal from service. It is not disputed that the High Court enhanced the penalty after affording opportunity to the two officials in accordance with law. Gurjar and Jadhav challenged the order of their removal by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court. The learned single Judge after considering the relevant provisions including the historical background of various constitutional reforms appears to have been of the view that the source of

































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