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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1342

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Girdhari Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : K.K. Kahlon.
For the Respondent: Gurpreet Singh.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. In this regular second appeal, the plaintiff assails the correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court. In a disciplinary proceeding after the charge sheet was served and a reply was filed, the inquiry officer was appointed. On receipt of the inquiry report, a show cause notice was issued and ultimately the disciplinary authority ordered stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect vide order dated 12.04.1984. The appellant filed the suit on 18.08.1990, to challenge the correctness of order dated 12.04.1984. The trial Court held that the order passed by the disciplinary authority is void ab initio and therefore, there is no limitation for filing of such suit, however, the First Appellate Court while relying upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Others vs. Gurdev Singh, (1991) 4 SCC 1, held that the period of limitation for filing such suit is three years under Article 113 of the schedule attached to the Limitation Act, 1963.

2. This Bench has heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper-book.

3. The learned counsel representi

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