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

2002 Supreme(AP) 516

B.SUDERSHAN REDDY, V.ESWARAIAH
J. Venkateswarlu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


( 51 ) THE next question that falls for consideration is about the validity of Clause (4) (d) of the Government Memo No. 700/sc/d/88-4, dated 13-2-1989.

( 52 ) THE Government of Andhra Pradesh having noticed a number of complaints that the investigations/enquiries by the Anti Corruption Bureau were taking long time resulting in officers, placed under suspension pending enquiry, to languish under suspension for long periods reviewed, in detail, the measures necessary to streamline the investigations/enquiries in ACB cases and accordingly issued guidelines with a view to ensure the expeditious completion of enquiries/investigations by the ACB. The instructions issued in Memo No. 700/sc/d/88-4, dated 13-2-1989 are mere guidelines. They are made for the guidance of all the concerned including the investigating/ enquiring authorities. Those guidelines in no manner interfere with the discretion and jurisdiction of the competent authorities concerned either in the matter of placing the accused officer under suspension pending enquiry or initiating such action, as may be necessary, in public interest to protect the integrity and purity of the investigation process. Clause (4) (d) of the sa
















































































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