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

2010 Supreme(All) 3910

F. I. REBELLO, A. P. SAHI
GHANSHYAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Arvind Nath Agrawal for the Appellant; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—The appellant was a village policeman appointed under the provisions of Oudh Laws Act, 1876 read with the provisions of the U.P. Police Regulations and U.P. Road Police Act, 1873. The appellant was dismissed from service by the order of the District Magistrate, Lalitpur dated 3rd June, 2006 which came to be assailed by the appellant in Writ Petition No. 37265 of 2006 complaining of violation of the aforesaid provisions particularly Section 36 of the 1876 Act. The writ petition was allowed on 19th July, 2006 on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice whereafter the District Magistrate passed a fresh order on 5th October, 2006 giving reasons for the dismissal. It is this order which was subjected to a challenge before the learned single Judge in the writ petition giving rise to the present appeal.

2. The contention raised by the appellant was that the provisions of Article 311 have been violated and there being no proper enquiry the order deserves to be set aside. Appellant’s counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Chandra Prakash Shahi v. State of U.P., 2000 (3) ESC 1625. The learned single Judge found that









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