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

2008 Supreme(MP) 27

A.M.NAIK
Ajay Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Gaurav Samadhiya for petitioner; V.S. Chaturvedi, Government Advocate for State.

ORDER

1. Petitioner was Asstt. Director, Fisheries at the relevant time at Ratlam. He was asked to attend training on Govt. expenses at Central Fisheries Education Institution, Mumbai for the training session 1997-99. Pursuant thereto, petitioner was relieved on 16.7.1997 from the office of the Asstt. Director Fisheries Ratlam for joining at Mumbai for the purposes of training. He reported at the training institution Mumbai on 17.7.1997. At the training institution, petitioner was required to deposit Rs. 3,065/- in addition to Rs. 1,450/- as hostel fees. These expenses were liable to be deposited by the Govt. which were not duly deposited. Since the petitioner was not possessed of sufficient money, he could not deposit the amount. Consequently, he was not allowed to attend the training. He came back to Ratlam and reported the matter to respondent No.2 immediately on 18.7.1997. Petitioner was, thereafter, suspended and was served with a show-cause notice marked as Annexure A-10. He submitted his reply as revealed in Annexure A-11, refuting the allegations and further explained the reasons for not attending the training. After receipt of the reply of the petitioner, the Director of Fi








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