Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Satish Chandra Verma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing conducted via video conferencing. (Para 1) |
| 2. respondent's filing of written submissions and procedure explained. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. timeframes for tribunal's hearing and disposals established. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. final order and procedural directions issued. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. In pursuance to the last order, both the parties have filed their written submissions.
3. In the respondents' written submissions, it is stated that the Ministry is in the process of sending its enquiry report to the UPSC for its advice after taking approval from the Disciplinary Authority and thereafter, the said advice shall be sent to the petitioner to file his representation. It is further stated that after receipt of the representation of the petitioner, the same shall be placed before the Disciplinary Authority, who will take its decision considering the enquiry report, advice of UPSC and representation of the petitioner.
4. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that no final decision can be taken by the Disciplinary Authority for atleast three months.
5. Since both the parties have filed
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
