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

1995 Supreme(SC) 723

B.L.HANSARIA, K.RAMASWAMY
G. Sundarasan – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates:
S.SRINIVASA VARMA

ORDER :- The petitioner was admittedly appointed in the quota of Scheduled Castes in the Income-tax Department and ultimately he rose to the status as Income-tax Inspector. Three years prior to retirement, he was called upon to prove that he is scheduled caste and departmental enquiry was held. He was given opportunity and it was found, relying upon the entries in service book, S. S. L. C. Register and other documentary evidence, that he is not a member of the scheduled caste and as such he is not eligible to enjoy the status as a scheduled caste in the Government service. On that premise, they imposed under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, punishment of forfeiting his pension. Calling in question that order dated December 9, 1987, the petitioner filed an O. A. in the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after elaborately considering the evidence on record, confirmed the finding of the disciplinary authority that the petitioner had wrongfully gained appointment against the post reserved for Scheduled Castes and imposition of penalty of forfeiture of pension was legal.

2. We have gone through the reasoning of the Tribunal. We find that the same are perfectly justified. It is vehemently contended by 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