DEEPAK GUPTA, S.TALAPATRA
Gautam Dey – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
Talapatra J.
By this writ petition, the petitioner who was a Constable in the Armed Branch of Tripura Police, has challenged the final order under D.O. No.602/2012 dated 26.11.2012 (Annexure-H to the writ petition), whereby he has been dismissed from the service pursuant to the purported disciplinary proceeding and also the order of the appellate authority dated 12.12.2013, confirming the said final order dismissing the petitioner from the service.
2. The facts are mostly admitted. Two departmental proceedings were launched against the petitioner for unauthorised absence on diverse period of time. In the first departmental proceeding, being D.P. No.02/2011 by the memorandum dated 10.02.2011 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) the following charges were framed against the petitioner:
ARTICLE OF CHARGE NO-I
C/3355 Goutam Dey of Armed Branch, South Tripura District is charged with gross misconduct and negligence in duty in that while he was attached to Dhajanagar Police lines on 13.01.2011 A.N, he unauthorizedly left Dhajanagar Police lines without prior permission from the competent authority. There after on 15.01.2011 evening he even assaulted by fist and blows to one Sri Subha
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969) 2 SCC 262
Union of India Vs. Mohd. Ramzan Khan
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. L. K. Ratna (1986) 4 SCC 537
Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India (1990) 1 SCC 613
C.B. Gautam v. Union of India : (1993) 1 SCC 78
Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad & Ors. Vs. B. Karunakar & Ors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.