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

2023 Supreme(All) 2525

AJIT KUMAR
Nahar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Nisheeth Yadav
For the Respondents: C.S.C.

JUDGMENT

Ajit Kumar, J.

Heard Sri Nisheeth Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S. Umrao, learned Standing Counsel.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order firstly by the disciplinary authority dated 26.06.2019, whereby, petitioner has been reverted back by five years to the minimum of the pay scale of a Constable, the order of the appellate authority dated 04.05.2020 affirming the same and of the revisional authority dated 17.11.2020 rejecting the revision on the ground that there is no procedural flaw in the matter of disciplinary proceedings.

3. The facts in a narrow compass can be drawn like this that the petitioner was issued with a charge sheet for remaining absent from duty w.e.f. 05.06.2002. He was proceeded against by holding a disciplinary proceeding and conducting departmental inquiry as a part thereof and since he was found guilty of the charges, he was issued with show cause notice on 01.04.2003 which was caused to be served upon him through his wife Smt. Sunita Yadav on 23.04.2003, however, when no reply was received from the petitioner, the disciplinary authority proceeded to inflict punishment of removal from service for being absent w.e.f. 05.06.2000 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