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

1987 Supreme(Raj) 575

KANTA BHATNAGAR, SOBHAG MAL JAIN
Mohd. Zakir – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. - In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the order Annexure 10 by which he was dismissed from service from the post of Store Munshi. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was not given proper opportunity to face the allegation of embezzlement of an amount of Rs. 6, 530/-. The legality of the order Annexure 10 has been challenged on a number of grounds. Mr. Udawat submits that the petitioner did not participate in the inquiries. He does not dispute that the order Annx. 10 does not contain the details of the material which might have been taken into consideration by the Chief Engineer passing that order. The order Aunexure 10 cannot be said to be a speaking order. What has been mentioned therein is that the authority passing the order has taken into consideration the charge-sheet, the statement of allegation and the explanation of the concerned employees. Who were those concerned employees and what was their explanation, cannot be deduced from reading this order. The order does not speak of consideration of the explanation filed by the petitioner. In this view of the matter, we d



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