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

2010 Supreme(All) 3567

SUDHIR AGARWAL
A. P. SATISH YADAV (CONSTABLE 221) – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Arvind Srivastava and Krishna Kumar Singh for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—This matter is pending for last two years, but despite time having been granted to the respondents, no counter-affidavit has been filed. The question raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is purely legal, therefore, as agreed by learned counsel for the parties, the matter is being heard and decided finally at this stage under the Rules of the Court.

2.The submission is that lacking control over the family by one cannot constitute any misconduct at all so as to warrant the disciplinary proceedings including suspension and any instruction or action by the higher authorities in this regard would also not amount to a matter relating to service of the concerned employee attracting any disciplinary proceedings. In the case in hand, the impugned order of suspension dated 5.10.2008 has been passed by Sri S.K. Bhagat, Senior Superintendent of Police, Moradabad placing the petitioner under suspension in a contemplated enquiry on the following allegations:

^^vius ifjokj ij fu;a=.k u j[kus ,oa mPpkf/kdkfj;ksa ds vkns’kksa dh vogsyuk djus ds QyLo:iA^^

3. Under his instructions, the Reserve Police Inspector, Moradabad has also passed an order on 4.10


















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