I.P.MUKERJI
Rajesh Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
I.P. MUKERJI, J.
1. The writ petitioner was in the Central Industrial Security Force Unit FBP at Farraka. He was appointed by a letter dated 23rd June, 2001.
On 21st April, 2005 he was issued a memorandum of charge under Rule 36 of the CISF Rules, 2001, by the appropriate authority. The charge against him was that he had suppressed in his declaration at the time of joining service that a criminal case under Section 427, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in 1999 was pending against him at the time of his appointment.
2. The petitioner denied the charge and pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority decided to conduct a regular departmental enquiry. By its order dated 1st July, 2005 the disciplinary authority appointed an enquiry officer and a presentation officer. The enquiry officer held the charge to be proved. This was confirmed by the disciplinary authority on 29th October, 2005, by its final order as follows: "reduction of pay by four stages from Rs. 3350/- to Rs. 3050/- in the time scale of pay for a period of four years with effect from the date of issue of final order with further direction that he will not earn increments of pay during
Chief Secretary v. Sushil Kumar
Commissioner of Police, Delhi v. Dhaval Singh
Devendra Kumar v. State of Uttaranchal
R. Radhakrishnan v. Director General of Police
Secretary, Department of Home Secy., A.P. v. B. Chinnam Naidu
State of West Bengal v. Sk. Nazrul Islam
The Regional Manager Bank of Baroda v. Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.