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

1998 Supreme(All) 1396

B.K.ROY, R.K.SINGH
KRISHNA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.K.Bisariya, V.M.Sahai


( 1 ) THROUGH this writ petition the petitioner Kirshna Kumar who retired as Deputy Excise Commissioner, has challenged the order dated 03. 11. 1995, (as contained in annexure no. 6 to the writ petition)deducting Rs. 1,66,580/- from his gratuity amount and deducting 10% of the pension admissible to him and as prayed for issuance of direction restoring all benefits of service to him and for releasing his gratuity amount forthwith

( 2 ) THE Petitioner was served with a charge-sheet on 30. 05. 1991 alleging that due to his negligence and misconduct the Government suffered a loss of Rs. 40780/- in the financial year 1983-84 while he was posted at Deoria and further loss of Rs. 1,25,800/- while he was posted at Allahabad. The Joint Excise Commissioner who was appointed enquiry officer to enquire into the charges, conducted enquiry and submitted his report on 30. 12. 1991, as contained in annexure no. 5 to the writ petition, suggesting to be discharged of the allegations. The controlling Officer examined the enquiry report. The government did not agree with the recommendations of the enquiry officer and passed the impugned order as contained in the annexure no. 6 to the writ petition dedu


















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