Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Section 4 Official Secrets Act Presumption and Prima Facie Evidence Bar Bail in Espionage Case: Punjab & Haryana HC
14 Mar 2026
Centre Revokes Wangchuk's NSA Detention Amid SC Challenge
14 Mar 2026
No Interference Allowed in Religious Prayers on Private Premises: Allahabad HC Cites Maranatha Precedent
14 Mar 2026
No Proof of Absolute Ownership by Mizo Chiefs Bars Fundamental Rights Claim Under Article 31: Supreme Court
14 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
ANIRUDDHA BOSE, SANJAY KUMAR
D. Ganesan – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted.
2. Rejoinder affidavit of the appellant is not on record.
3. Ms. Mohana, learned senior counsel, appearing for the appellant, however, submits that she won’t rely on the rejoinder affidavit and wants to proceed with the hearing of this matter on the basis of available pleadings.
4. The appellant, who was working with Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), is aggrieved by the judgment and order of the High Court passed on 28.04.2022 in Writ Petition No.54 of 2020 imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement upon him. The operative part of the order of the High Court reads:-
In facts of a given case, disciplinary proceeding could continue simultaneously with criminal inquiry – There is no legal bar on running such parallel proceedings though in certain situations, Suprem....
Fraud unravels everything, and a fraudulent claim for employment cannot be saved by equitable considerations. Obtaining employment through deceit has serious consequences and can lead to dismissal fr....
The court ruled that while misconduct was established, the punishment of compulsory retirement was excessive and disproportionate, warranting judicial intervention.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article