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

2016 Supreme(All) 1504

SUDHIR AGARWAL, RANJANA PANDYA
GIRISH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Shishir Jain for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—Heard Sri Shishir Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

2. The writ petition is directed against order dated 14.10.2005 passed by Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of U.P., Lucknow imposing punishment of dismissal upon petitioner from the post of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department.

3. The only ground of challenge pressed before this Court is that though a major penalty has been imposed upon petitioner but no oral inquiry whatsoever was conducted by Inquiry Officer. After submission of charge-sheet without holding any oral inquiry and recording of statement of witnesses, Inquiry Officer straightway submitted report and thereafter punishment of dismissal has been imposed upon petitioner on the basis of said inquiry report. Our attention is drawn to para 3 of writ petition, which reads as under:

“3. That the Enquiry Officer did not hold any enquiry in the matter. No opportunity of oral hearing was given to the petitioner by the Enquiry Officer and no opportunity was given to the petitioner to appear and participate in the enquiry. The petitioner was never informed about the date, t

































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