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

1994 Supreme(SC) 523

K.RAMASWAMY, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH
State Of M. P. – Appellant
Versus
L. P. Tiwari – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K.SINGH, AMITABH VERMA, ASHOK MATHUR, RAJU RAMACHANDRAN, S.K.AGNIHOTRI

JUDGMENT

Delay condoned. Leave granted.

2. The appellant had contemplated disciplinary proceedings against the respondent and considered it expedient to keep the respondent under suspension pending the said proceedings. By proceeding dated April 24, 1990, the respondent was suspended and it was served on him on 25-9-1990. A charge-sheet was framed against the respondent on July 5, 1990 and was sent to the Engineer-in-Chief, at Bhopal for effecting its service who in his letter dated November 8, 1990 requested the Chief Engineer (Central) at Jabalpur to serve the charge-sheet on the respondent. The latter in turn endorsed it to the Suptdg. Engineer, Panna who deputed his head clerk to serve the charge-sheet on the respondent. The endorsement made by the head clerk on December 21, 1990, reads thus:

"The Head Clerk had gone to Pahadukodi and met Shri Tiwari, Executive Engineer, and gave him the letters. But as informed by the Head Clark in writing that he refused to accept the said letters on some pretext, the same are being sent to you in original."

Thereafter, the service was effected after the expiry of 90 days. The respondent challenged the order of suspension in the Administrative T

























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