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

2011 Supreme(MP) 744

SUJOY PAUL
Suresh Chand Upadhyay – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Susheel Chaturvedi for petitioner;
V.K. Bharadwaj with Raja Sharma for respondents.

ORDER

1. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of this matter are as under:

The petitioner who was a Constable in Railway Protection Force was subjected to disciplinary proceedings pursuant to the issuance of charge-sheet (Annexure P-1) dated 9.2.1993. The said charge-sheet was followed by departmental enquiry. After the enquiry a punishment of removal from service was inflicted on the petitioner by order dated 25.2.1994. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid punishment order, preferred an appeal before the statutory appellate authority. However, the said appellate authority did not decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner. At this stage, petitioner filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The Allahabad High Court passed the order in Writ Petition No.14226/94 on 25.1.2005 (page 77). A perusal of the order of the High Court shows that this was an admitted position between the parties that enquiry officer’s report was not supplied to the petitioner before imposition of punishment of removal. However, the High Court did not deal with the merits of the matter and relegated the petitioner to avail statutory remedy of revision by preferring a revision pe













































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