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

1965 Supreme(Cal) 256

A.C.SENGUPTA
BIBHUTI BHUSAN PAUL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN KUMR DUTT, B.C.Dutt, SHYAM KUMAR MAJUMDAR, SUSHIL BANERJI

A. C. SEN, J.

( 1 ) ON the petition tiled by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution a Rule was issued calling upon the opposite parties to show cause why a Writ in the nature of Mandamus should not be issued directing the opposite parties 1 to 6 to recall, rescind, withdraw or not to give effect to, the impugned order of opposite party No. 2, dated January 25, 1956. The Rule further required the opposite parties to show cause why a Writ in the nature of Certiorari should not be issued cancelling, setting aside or quashing the impugned order dated January 25, 1965.

( 2 ) BY the said order the petitioner was demote and his increment was stopped for two years.

( 3 ) THE petitioners complaints against the departmental proceedings culminating in the impugned order of demotion and postponement of increment are that the dismissing authority acted throughout mala fide, that rules of natural justice were violated at every step and that he was not given reasonable opportunity to make his representation against the charges or against the punishment proposed.

( 4 ) IT is contended that there is internal evidence of want of good faith in the charge-sheet in the direction given















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