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

2010 Supreme(Raj) 1300

MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Brij Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Shiv Charan Gupta, Counsel.
For the Respondents: Kamlakar Sharma with Tapasvi Vashistha, Counsel.

JUDGMENT

1. - Heard learned counsel for parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner Brij Pal Singh with prayer that respondents be directed to consider his c idature for promotion to the post of Assistant Director and that he may not be adjudged unsuitable for promotion on the basis of order dated 14.12.1995. Petitioner has also prayed for quashing the validity of penalty order dated 14.12.1995 by which recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,732.68p. has been ordered to be made from him and the order dated 09.10.1998 by which his appeal filed against that penalty order was rejected taking it as time barred.Shri Shiv Charan Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner, submitted that petitioner and one Ram Lal Bissu both were proceeded against in disciplinary proceedings under Regulation 6 of the Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation (Staff) Regulations, 1974. While charge-sheet was served on petitioner on 03.05.1994 under Regulation 6 (Supra) on allegation that while he was working as Manager (Warehouse) at Suratgarh in April, 1992, shortage of 2.5% of stock amounting to Rs. 3,732.68p. was found therein, whereas, as per instructions of the Food Corporation of India, shortage of 0.75%













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