Back
RAVI NATH TILHARI, K. MANMADHA RAO
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek judicial review of tribunal order. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. background of charges against the 2nd respondent. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. 2nd respondent's contention against departmental proceedings. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. legal arguments regarding delay in proceedings. (Para 12 , 15 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. court's analysis on the justification for disciplinary actions. (Para 14 , 22 , 23 , 38) |
| 6. principles on delay in disciplinary proceedings. (Para 27 , 34 , 41) |
| 7. conclusions drawn by the court regarding tribunal's order. (Para 63 , 64) |
JUDGMENT
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J. - Heard Sri T. Ashok Srivastava Reddy, learned counsel, appearing for the Deputy Solicitor General of India for the petitioners and Sri Ravi Kiran, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
2. The petitioners - Union of India and its Railway Authorities have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:
"....to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Certiorari by calling for the order dt. 2/11/2018 in O.A.No.020/00362/2016 on the file of Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench and declare the
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
