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

2003 Supreme(All) 376

SUDHIR NARAIN, S.R.ALAM, BHANWAR SINGH
ASHA RAM VERMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Deepak Srivastava, Kishore Kumar Singh, R.P.SINGH

SUDHIR NARAIN, J.

( 1 ) THIS Full Bench has been constituted to answer the following question :

"in absence of applicability of Evidence Act to departmental enquiries, on what basis the concepts of "admissibility" or "relevancy" of evidence can be imported into departmental enquiry?"

( 2 ) THE question referred to above arises on the facts given below :

"the State of U. P. implemented the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission Report from 1. 1. 1996. This report provided that the pay scale of the Government employee shall be fixed on new pay scales. The Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a Government Order dated 6. 9. 1997 addressing to the Commissioner/secretary, Board of Revenue, U. P. , Lucknow, wherein it was stated that the pay scale of Tehsildars/apar Tehslldars is being enhanced in the pay scale of Rs. 2,200-4,000 and in the like manner, the pay scales of Naib Tehsildars being Rs. 1,400-2,300 is being enhanced at Rs. 1,640-2,900. In view of the said Government Order, respondent No. 2 issued an order on 29. 10. 1997 directing all District Magistrates/commissioners of the State of U. P. to revise the pay scales of Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars in accordance with the Governmen












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