K.RAMASWAMY, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH
Commissioner, Food And Civil Supplies, Lucknow, U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Prakash Chandra Saxena – Respondent
ORDER
1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. Heard counsel for the parties. Respondent 1, while was working as Senior Inspector, District Supply Office, Lucknow, his services were terminated by proceedings dated 14-7-1965 :
"The services of Shri Prakash Chandra Saxena, Senior Inspector, District Supply Office, Lucknow are terminated with effect from the date of service upon him of this order. He shall be paid one months pay in lieu of notice."
The said proceedings were challenged by Respondent 1 in the year 1978 by filing a claim petition before the Service Tribunal which was initially rejected by the Tribunal on the ground of delay. But the High Court remitted the matter for decision on merits and the Tribunal held that the order of termination had been made by way of punishment without enquiry and hence violated Article 311(2) of the Constitution. When it was challenged in Writ Petition No. 2016 of 1991 filed by the appellant, the High Court dismissed it by its order dated 5-3-1993, following the decision of this Court in Samsher Singh v. State of Punjab {(1974) 2 SCC 831} wherein it had been held that the Court had to lift the veil and find whether the ground of termination was the fo
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.