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

2012 Supreme(All) 1297

SUDHIR AGARWAL
RAJ KUMAR GAUTAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Vijay Gautam for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Writ petition has been restored to its original number vide order of date passed on recall application. As requested by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and is being disposed of finally.

2. This writ petition is directed against the punishment order dated 25.1.2009 and the appellate order dated 11.7.2009 whereby the punishment of withholding of integrity has been imposed by petitioner and his appeal thereagaisnt has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the said punishment is without jurisdiction since under Rule 4 of U.P. Police officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules, 1991”) there is no such punishment like withholding of integrity and, therefore, imposition of said punishment is wholly without jurisdiction. He placed reliance on an Apex Court’s decision in State Bank of India and others v. T.J. Paul, JT 1999(3) 385 and a recent decision in Vijay Singh v. State of U.P. and others, JT 2012(4) SC 105, wherein the Apex Court has said that punishment not prescribed in Rules cannot be imposed upon a delinquent e







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