Back
V. KAMESWAR RAO, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
Dinesh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao (Oral)
CM APPL. 16583/2023
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 4299/2023 & CM APPL. 16584/2023
3. The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated December 05, 2022, passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (`Tribunal', in short) in O.A. 129/2022, where the Tribunal has in paragraphs 3 & 4 stated as under:
"3. The records of this case are called for. A letter dated 05.03.2021 was shown to us where the applicant took benefit of a forged letter No. DH685/COM/SDMC/2021 dated 5.03.2021.
4. In view of this, we are of the view that the applicant has not come before this Tribunal with clean hands. Hence, the present O.A. is dismissed in terms of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, AIR 1994 SC 853, wherein it is held that where a person, who has not come with clean hands, the Tribunals or Courts shall not give any heed to such cases."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners is neither in receipt or aware of the contents of letter dated 05.03.2021, on which reliance has been placed by the Tribunal to state that the same has be
The court has the power of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings and can set aside orders if they are not in accordance with the law.
The need for petitioners to challenge the rejection of their representation before the Tribunal by way of fresh proceedings.
The appointment of the last selectee to the post shall be subject to the outcome of the Original Application.
Administrative authority cannot review judicially quashed charge memorandum attaining finality by issuing fresh inquiry notices absent statutory power; violates judicial discipline.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that inordinate delay, non-supply of documents, withdrawal of charge sheet, and lack of reasoning in dismissal orders can vitiate departmental proc....
The court emphasized that the challenge to the dismissal order was not barred by time, and the dismissal order was set aside as it was not practicable to call the officials of the State Education Boa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a claim for promotion can be time-barred, and the petitioner must meet the benchmark for promotion as stipulated in the relevant regulations.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
