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

2023 Supreme(All) 2465

ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
Sunil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ramesh Singh.
For the Respondent: C.S.C.

Table of Content
1. writ petition challenges disciplinary actions. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. petitioner argues for equal treatment in sanctions. (Para 8 , 9)
3. respondents confirm proper disciplinary process. (Para 10 , 11)
4. court finds misconduct, upholds tribunal's decision. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
5. established law restricts court's interference in punishments. (Para 15 , 16)
6. writ petition dismissed; no costs ordered. (Para 17 , 18)

JUDGMENT

Heard Shri Ramesh Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Aakash Sinha, learned State Counsel representing the respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4.

2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, Sunil Kumar, assailing (i) the judgment and order dated 28.09.2018 passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Indira Bhawan, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal") in Claim Petition No. 935 of 2017, (ii) judgment and order dated 15.11.2019 passed in Review Petition No. 67 of 2019. Apparently, the claim petition No. 935 of 2017 has been preferred by the writ petitioner against (a) the order of punishment/censure dated 14.12.2016 and (b) the appellate order dated 21.04.20

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