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

1994 Supreme(SC) 86

A.M.AHMADI, K.RAMASWAMY, S.C.AGRAWAL
State Of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Hari Ram Yadav – Respondent


Advocates:
Indu Malhotra, MANOJ SVARUP, NISHA BAGCHI, P.P.Rao, R.K.GUPTA

Judgment

S.C. AGRAWAL, J.:-This appeal is directed against the order dated October 12, 1992 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The question that arises for consideration is whether the order dated November 25, 1991, whereby Hari Ram Yadav, respondent No. 1, was placed under suspension during the pendency of disciplinary proceeding initiated against him, has been passed in accordance with the provisions of Rule 3(1) of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

2. Respondent No. 1 is a member of the Indian Forest Service and belongs to Haryana State cadre of the said service. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on the basis of charge-sheet dated April 29, 1990. During the pendency of the said disciplinary proceedings another chargesheet dated November 25, 1991 was issued. On the same day, i.e., November 25, 1991, an order was passed whereby respondent No.1 was placed under suspension. Respondent No. 1 filed a petition (O.A. No. 1573/CH/91) under S. 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 which has been allowed by the tribunal by order dat

































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