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

2001 Supreme(AP) 337

S.ANANDA REDDY, S.R.NAYAK
B. Kishtu – Appellant
Versus
High Court of A. P. – Respondent


S. R. NAYAK, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner while serving as Deputy nazir in the Munsif Magistrate Court, boath, by the impugned proceedings of the high Court in Roc. No. 500/90-B. Spl (SC), dated 31-1-1994 was ordered to retire compulsorily as a measure of disciplinary action. Hence, this writ petition, assailing the validity and legality of the same.

( 2 ) THE background relevant facts to be stated briefly are as under: the disciplinary authority, namely, the learned District and Sessions Judge, adilabad, 2nd respondent herein initiated departmental enquiry against the petitioner and four others, framing as many as 16 charges. Though, initially the charges were issued against the petitioner and four others, it appears that the enquiry against sri V. Shankarachary, Munsif Magistrate, boath was separated from common enquiry and the enquiry was conducted against the remaining four delinquents. Among 16 charges, the petitioner herein was charged with only Charges No. 7 and 8, which read as follows: charge No. 7: That the then District and Sessions Judge, Adilabad during his surprise visit of M. M. Court, Boath on 8-10-1990 found missing of kgs. 0-200 gms. of Ganja in CPR no. 37/89 in Cr. No









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