SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Raj) 168

AJAY RASTOGI
Chandrapal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. R.A. Katta, for the Petitioners.
Mr. B.K. Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate, for the State. Conclusion:

Judgment

Ajay Rastogi, J.-Instant writ petition has been filed by petitioner who was served with three different charge sheets under Rule 170 of Rajasthan Civil Service Rules ("R.S.R.") after he retired from service and was punished with vide orders dated 30.07.1988 (Annexure1-H), revised vide order dated 02.05.1991 (Annexure1-J) and dated 27.08.1988 (Annexure 2-H so also order dated 30.07.1988 (Annexure 3-C).

2. While petitioner was posted as Assistant Settlement Officer, Tehsil Pratapgarh in year 1979-81, certain quasi judicial orders were passed by him inter alia with regard to mutation or change in khatedari rights of applicants who moved respective applications before him under tenancy and land revenue laws and crux of the charges imputed against him was that those applications were considered by the authority to be in violation of relevant laws ; therefore, after he retired from service on 31.01.1983, he was served with three different charge sheets in exercise of powers under Rule 170 of RSR.

3. In first charge sheet dated 22.08.1983 (Annexure1-A), allegation in substance against him was that on an application filed by Onkar S/o Ghasi on 25.05.1981 praying for transfer of Kh























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top