Back
SUREPALLI NANDA
K. Ram Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda – Respondent
ORDER :
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition is filed to issue a Writ, order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned G.O.Rt.No.578, Home, dated 12.05.2014 in so far as treating the suspension period as not on duty is concerned and the connected Govt. Memo No.1493/Ser.II/A1/2014, Home Department, dated 05.11.2014, in so far as the petitioner is concerned as being illegal, arbitrary unjust, contrary to the Fundamental Rules and also subversive of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution and consequently hold that the suspension period of the petitioner from 15.07.2008 to 04.03.2009 is to be treated as on duty for all purposes with all consequential benefits.
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:
a) The petitioner was appointed as Civil Police Constable w.e.f. 15.08.1993. The petitioner was placed under suspension while working at Vijayapuri P.S., Nalgonda District by proceedings R.O.No.775/2008, dated 14.07.2008 issued by the 1st respondent on the ground that gross reprehensible misconduct in demanding bribe of Rs.20,000/- and accepti
The duty of the competent authority to consider and pass specific orders regarding pay, allowances, and the treatment of the suspension period as duty, and the principles of natural justice in afford....
The court ruled that a government servant's suspension period must be treated as on duty with full pay if acquitted of charges and if disciplinary proceedings result in a minor penalty.
Suspension regularization under FR 54-B based on initial justification, not acquittal nature; re-examination required absent disciplinary proceedings.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Rule 54 of the Rules, emphasizing the importance of principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedi....
Even though there is no express requirement in Fundamental Rule 54[3] for giving an opportunity to employee before passing an order, giving of such an opportunity is implicit in the exercise of power....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of rule 54-B of the Fundamental Rules and the discretion of the Disciplinary Authority in justifying a suspension and determining e....
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
