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

2005 Supreme(Pat) 158

V.N.SINHA
Yugal Kishore Pd. Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. Petitioner has questioned the validity of the order bearing Memo No. 7824 dated 31.8.1996, Annexure 14 and the appellate order dated 1.7.1999 bearing Memo No. 2317 dated 5th July, 1999, Annexure 15, whereunder punishments imposed after conclusion of the departmental proceedings were affirmed in appeal.

3. Learned counsel appearing in support of this application has confined his prayer to quash punishment no. 2 whereunder the petitioner has been directed to be paid only the subsistence allowance for the period between 30.4.91 to 31.5.1995 when his joining was not accepted without any fault on his part, which is wholly without jurisdiction, as such for the said period between 30.4.91 and 31.5.95 petitioner should be paid the full salary.

4. Before I consider the prayer of the counsel for the petitioner, it is necessary to mention a few facts. Petitioner, who earlier served as Cooperative Supervisor in the office of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jehanabad circle, was transferred to the office of the Divisional Joint Registrar, Tirhut Division under order bearing Memo No. 5110 dated 3.4.1979, Annexure 1

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