Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, TALWANT SINGH
Chandu Venkateswarlu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing of disciplinary order (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's view on procedural integrity (Para 3 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. petitioner's defense against allegations (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. court's judgement on evidence sufficiency (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. disciplinary findings found perverse and quashed (Para 25 , 26 , 28) |
| 6. final order of reinstatement (Para 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT
Siddharth Mridul, J. (via Video Conferencing)--The present Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeks quashing of order dated 17.02.2014, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "learned Tribunal") in O.A. No. 192 of 2013; whereby the learned Tribunal upheld the order dated 19.12.2012, passed by the Disciplinary Authority, imposing the penalty of compulsory retirement from service upon the Petitioner.
2. The facts as are necessary for the adjudication of the present Writ Petition are adumbrated hereinbelow: -
(i) The Petitioner was appointed to the Group A Service of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, on 10.06.1997. After the successful completion of his training, the Petitioner was
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
