Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
B.K. Shrivastava, Judicial Member, Santosh Mehra, Administrative Member
Umesh Babu M. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history of oa amendment (Para 1) |
| 2. second domestic enquiry and termination (Para 2) |
| 3. applicant's arguments on violations (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. respondents' defense on enquiry fairness (Para 5) |
| 5. compliance with high court cross-examination order (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 6. documents supplied adequately (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 7. no reasonable apprehension of bias (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. enquiry and penalty justified (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 9. nvs 1993 notification valid for summary enquiry (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 10. teacher's conduct demands exemplary punishment (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 11. oa dismissed, no interference (Para 40 , 41 , 42) |
O R D E R
PER: JUSTICE B.K. SHRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (J)
1. Initially, this OA was filed on 05.06.2023 for quashment of the penalty order dated 12.09.2022 (Annexure – A1). At the time of filing this O.A., the departmental appeal preferred by the applicant was pending. During pendency of the petition, the appeal was also decided. Therefore, the applicant filed MA No.109/2024 which was allowed on 06.03.2024 and the challenge against the appellate order dated 26.10.2023 (Annexure – A21)
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
