AMRITA SINHA
RAMESH SARAN RAI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
AMRITA SINHA, J.
1. A first information report dated 16th September, 2011 registered under section 109 IPC, and sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') is impugned in the instant writ petition. The petitioner prays for quashing the same.
2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows:
The petitioner joined the Indian Railway Traffic Service on 11th October, 1992. He held various posts in the railway service. While the petitioner was serving as the Deputy Chief Operations Manager, freight operations information system, Kolkata he tendered his resignation on 23rd July, 2007. Under Indian Railway Establishment Code (volume 1) Rule 302 a clearance from the vigilance was necessary prior to acceptance of resignation of a railway officer. Vide memo dated 2nd August, 2007 the Deputy Chief Personal Officer on behalf of the General Manager, South Eastern Railway intimated the Secretary, Railway Board that no vigilance and special police enquiry case was pending against the petitioner. The General Manager requested the Board for acceptance of the resignation of the petitioner with effect from 23rd October, 20
Chirag M. Pathak & Ors. Vs. Dollyben Kantilal Patel & Ors
Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors
M. Krishna Reddy Vs. State Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hyderabad
Mosiruddin Munsi Vs. Md. Siraj & Anr.
P. Sirajuddin, Vs. State of Madras
Satyanarayan Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
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.