Back
VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, VIKAS BUDHWAR
Poonam Rani – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of dismissal case. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding locus standi and legality of dismissal. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. discussion on locus standi. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. public interest litigation vs public law litigation. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. maintainability of the current petition. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. constitutional provisions regarding employment and dismissals. (Para 29 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 42) |
| 7. distinction between dismissal and removal. (Para 44 , 46 , 52 , 54) |
| 8. conclusion of the court's decision. (Para 56 , 57) |
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Budhwar, J.
1. Heard Sri Chandra Jeet Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nand Lal Mourya, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for the respondents.
FACTS
2. Factual matrix of the case as worded in the writ petition are that the petitioner Smt. Poonam Rani claims herself to be the the wife of Sri Yogesh Kumar, who was posted as Junior Engineer in Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Victoria Park, Meerut. Records reveal that certain allegations were levelled against his performance while discharging official duty which occasioned laying of a trap pursuant wh
Section 2(c) of the U.P. Public Services (Reservation For Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters And Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993 is intra vires and not in violation of the Article 14 and....
Point of Law : Since the appointment of the 7th respondent is made, creating a supernumerary post, there is no other option to the petitioner, than to approach this Court, by filing a writ petition s....
Public interest litigations in service matters should not be entertained, and the provision of review is not to scrutinize the correctness of the decision rendered but to correct any error visible on....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that a government servant cannot be dismissed from service based on a criminal conviction without considering the conduct leading to the convict....
Dismissal of a government employee under Article 311(2)(a) does not require a departmental inquiry if based on conviction for a criminal charge, provided the authority acts within its powers.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
