Uttam Chand Rana vs L. I. C of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(P&H) 407

JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Uttam Chand Rana – Appellant
Versus
L. I. C of India – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Parminder Singh Kanwar, Advocate with Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J.

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of inquiry report dated 29.08.2016 (Annexure P-3) and order dated 18.01.2017 (Annexure P-6) whereby penalty of reduction by two stages in the time scale of pay has been imposed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that on the same set of allegations, the petitioner was subjected to departmental as well as criminal proceedings. The petitioner on the one hand was subjected to punishment of reduction of pay by order dated 18.01.2017 (Annexure P-6) passed by the disciplinary authority and on the other hand, he was made to face criminal trial. The Trial Court vide judgment dated 24.05.2019 (Annexure P-2) acquitted the petitioner on the ground that prosecution has not led evidence in terms of Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The penalty awarded by the disciplinary authority deserves to be set aside in view of judgment of acquittal passed by Trial Court.

3. On being asked, Mr. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was pursuing trial pending against him, thus, he could not assail order dated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document