Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
JASPREET SINGH, MANISH MATHUR, SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Sudhir Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Appointment Deptt.Lucknow – Respondent
To check the current status of a case, you can follow these steps:
Visit the official website of the Supreme Court or the relevant judicial authority where the case is filed. Many courts provide an online case status or case tracking system that allows you to search by case number, party name, or other details (!) .
Use the case number or party details to perform a search in the court's case management system or database. This will provide the latest updates, including hearing dates, orders, or any pending proceedings (!) .
If online information is not available or insufficient, you can contact the court registry or clerk’s office directly. They can provide you with the current status of the case and any upcoming dates or developments (!) .
You may also consult your lawyer or legal representative, who can access the court records and provide you with the latest updates on the case status (!) .
In summary, the most efficient way is to use the official court website or contact the court directly, providing the case details for accurate and up-to-date information.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. constitution of larger bench due to difference of opinion. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. challenge to the discharge orders of service. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. incident involving altercation resolved amicably. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. argument on discharge being punitive without inquiry. (Para 14 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. violation of article 311(2) requiring opportunity for hearing. (Para 22 , 23 , 25) |
| 6. discharge order based on misconduct requires inquiry. (Para 84 , 90 , 92) |
| 7. court quashes discharge orders and reinstates petitioners. (Para 94 , 96) |
JUDGMENT :
(Delivered by Hon’ble Manish Mathur, J.)
1. These petitions have been placed before this Full Bench due to difference of opinion between two Hon'ble Judges earlier hearing the matters.
2. Considering the same, vide order dated 11.12.2018 records were required to be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for nomination of Larger Bench in terms of Chapter VIII Rule 3 of ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RULES 1952 whereafter the Full Bench has been constituted in terms of order dated 13.11.2019 and reconstituted vide order dated 16.8.2023 by Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Vide order dated 12.8.2021, writ petitions No. 1502 (S/B) of 2014 (now Wr
Discharge of probationers is considered punitive when based on allegations of misconduct, requiring a proper inquiry under Article 311(2) of the Constitution.
Discharge of a probationary judicial officer based on misconduct allegations without a proper inquiry violates constitutional protections, constituting punitive action and inflicting stigma.
The discharge of a probationer must comply with procedural requirements, and insufficient assessment of performance leads to implied confirmation, while discharge based on unsatisfactory work isn't p....
It is a well settled position of law that in respect of an order of termination of service simplicitor, it is not a stigmatic one.
The maximum period of probation does not confer a right to confirmation; unsatisfactory performance justifies termination without a disciplinary hearing.
Where the form of the order is merely a camouflage for an order of dismissal for misconduct it is always open to the Court before which the order is challenged to go behind the form and ascertain the....
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
