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

2011 Supreme(SC) 768

R.M.LODHA, AFTAB ALAM
Oriental Bank of Commerce – Appellant
Versus
R. K. Uppal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R.M. Lodha, J. —

Two questions presented for consideration in this appeal by special leave, at the instance of the appellants—Oriental Bank of Commerce and its General Manager - are: (one) whether in terms of regulation 17 of Oriental Bank of Commerce Officer Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1982 (for short, ‘the 1982 Regulations’), the appellate authority is required to accord personal hearing to the respondent in a departmental appeal; and (two) whether the order dated June 4, 2004 passed by the appellate authority in the appeal preferred by the respondent under regulation 17 suffers from infirmity for want of reasons.

2. The brief facts leading to the above questions are these : the respondent—R.K. Uppal (hereinafter referred to as ‘delinquent’) faced departmental inquiry under regulation 6 of the 1982 Regulations for acts of omission and commission committed by him while working as Senior Manager/Incumbent In-charge at 19-D, Chandigarh Branch. The article of charges served on the delinquent contained four charges, namely : (I) between the period September 14, 1999 to December 20, 1999, while recommending sanction of credit facilities and further enhancem










































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