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

2023 Supreme(Pat) 406

MADHURESH PRASAD
Amar Kant Chaubey – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Shekhar.
For the State : Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, AC to GP-5.

MADHURESH PRASAD, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. While the petitioner was posted as Station House Officer (for brevity ‘SHO’) at Laukahi, he proceeded for leave of five days from 06.03.2006. The leave was sanctioned on the ground of demise in the family. The petitioner did not resume his duty w.e.f. 12.03.2006. He has overstayed for five days beyond the period of leave. The said lapse on the part of petitioner has been taken cognizance by the Authorities, who have issued a charge memo dated 20.04.2006, as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The two charges for which the inquiry was conducted are as follows:—

^^¼d½ tc ;s ykSgdh Fkkuk ds Fkkuk izHkkjh ds :i esa inLFkkfir Fks rks fnukad 06-03-2006 ds vijkg~u esa 5 fnuksa ds vkdfLed vodk'k esa izLFkku fd;s FksA buds vkosnu esa fj'rsnkj dh e`R;q gksus dk dkj.k fy[kk x;k FkkA bUgsa fnukad 12-03-2006 dks vius drZO; ij ;ksxnku djuk pkfg, Fkk] ijUrq ;s gksyh ioZ egRoiw.kZ fofèk&OoLFkk dk;Z gksus ds ckotwn Hkh LosPNk ls vodk'k esa fiNM+sA

¼[k½ dq[;kr vijkèkh lat; ;kno dks fxjrkj djus dk vkns'k budks fn;k x;k Fkk] ijUrq buds }kjk fxjrkj ugha fd;k x;kA tcfd vijkèkh Fkkuk {ks= esa gh Fk

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