Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
Vijay Malhan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges bank removal order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. petitioner argues procedural unfairness and malafide actions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. respondents defend disciplinary proceedings and challenge petitioner’s claims. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 4. court affirms importance of principles of natural justice. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 5. court stipulates standards for procedural fairness and evidence in disciplinary matters. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65) |
| 6. court dismisses petition; finds no grounds for interference. (Para 89 , 90 , 91 , 92) |
JUDGMENT
Chandra Dhari Singh, J. The instant civil writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Petitioner who was earlier posted as the Assistant General Manager, Regional Inspectorate at Chandigarh, challenging the order dated 23rd January 2003 directing the removal of Petitioner from services of Oriental Bank of Commerce (hereinafter referred to as "Respondent Bank") pas
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
