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

1996 Supreme(All) 1161

B.KUMAR, I.P.VASISHTHA
Chandra Prakash Jain – Appellant
Versus
State Of U P – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate appeared:
Shiv P. Shukla,

Judgment :

I. P. Vasisth, J.

1. The petitioner prays for a writ of certiorari quashing the charge-sheet contained in Annexure 6 along with the consequent proceedings and a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to release his full pension, gratuity, G. P. F. and other retiral dues.

2. AFTER putting in about three decades of service in the State Police Department, the petitioner retired from the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on 31-10-1990 on attaining the normal age of superannuation (58 years). It was pleaded that during his active service, vide their orders dated 10-8-1978 contained in Annexure 1 attacicd with the petition, the departmen tal authorities conveyed the following ad verse remarks to him for the year 1977-78:

a "but supervision over subordinate staff was not effective."

b. "he occupied office flat for residential purpose for which rent was paid by the Government and he also charged house rent from the Government which casts adverse reflection on his integrity. "

As a consequence of the aforesaid remarks, he was not allowed to cross the E. B. on 10-1-1978 which was the due date. However, in view of his representation, the respondents permitted him th















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