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

2022 Supreme(MP) 55

SUJOY PAUL, DWARKADHISH BANSAL
Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
K. K. Mishra – Respondent


Advocates:
Prashant Singh, Advocate General with Anoop Nair for appellants; Ms. Shobha Menon with Ms. Aanchal Saraf and
D. K. Tripathi for respondents.

ORDER (Oral)

Paul, J. -- 1. On the joint request, matters were analogously heard and decided by this common order passed. These intra-Court appeals take exception to the orders passed by the learned Single Judge. Since, question of law involved in all these matters is similar, on the joint request of the parties, the matters were analogously heard and decided by this common order.

W.A. No. 75/2022

2. In this writ appeal, the employer assailed the order passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 24414/2021 decided on 6.1.2022. The singular legal issue raised for determination was whether the charge-sheet dated 21.1.2020 Annexure P/13 and supplementary charge-sheet dated 15.5.2020 Annexure P/19 were issued by the competent disciplinary authority namely Managing Director.

3. Shri Prashant Singh, learned senior counsel at the outset fairly submitted that it is not in dispute that Managing Director is the disciplinary authority as per the relevant schedule of M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (in short ‘CCA Rules’) which were adopted by the appellant

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