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

2008 Supreme(All) 1776

PRAFULLA C.PANT
KASTUBA NAND PATHAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL – Respondent


Advocates:
BINA PANDEY, P.C.BISHT,

By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 14. 02. 2005, passed by competent authority/appoint ing authority, whereby the petitioner has been punished after the departmental enquiry with censure entry in the char acter roll and further withholding the part of salary except the subsistence allowance during the period of suspen sion. The petitioner has further chal lenged the order dated 17. 12. 2004, is sued by competent authority/appointing authority to the petitioner, enclosing therewith enquiry report, submitted by the Enquiry Officer, for his reply/com ments.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit, coun ter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Clerk on 13. 11. 1979, and later pro moted as Senior Clerk, in the District Audit Office, Local Funds Account, Nainital, injune 1984. Thereafter, the petitioner was transferred to several places (in 1987 to Almora, in 1994 to Pauri Garhwal, in 1998 again to Almora and in the year 2005 to District Pithoragarh










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