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

2001 Supreme(All) 881

O.P.GARG, O.BHATT
VIJENDRA PAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Dharmendra Singh, Gopal Krishna, Prem Babu Verma, S.M.A.QAZMI, S.U.KHAN, SUDHIR AGRAWAL

ONKARESHWAR BHATT, J.

( 1 ) BY means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order of removal dated 11. 7. 1997, Annexure-9 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to take the petitioner in service without any interruption or break and further to pay all the benefits as admissible under Rules.

( 2 ) AFFIDAVITS have been exchanged and we have heard Sri S. U. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sudhir Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondents.

( 3 ) THE petitioner is a direct recruit to Higher Judicial Service and he joined the service on 7. 12. 1986. From June. 1991 till May 31, 1994, the petitioner was working as Additional District and Sessions Judge at Budaun. At Budaun he performed the duties of Incharge District Judge from September, 1992 till June 1, 1993. The District Magistrate and the Superintendent of police, Budaun, made complaints against the petitioner. The District Judge called for comments of the petitioner which was submitted by him. The District Judge reported his obse






















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