Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Veena Kothavale, Judicial Member, Sisir Kumar Ratho, Administrative Member
S.Kotteeswaran – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of cbi case, charges, and prolonged disciplinary proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 7) |
| 2. parties' arguments and cited precedents on delay. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 3. unexplained inordinate delay vitiates disciplinary proceedings causing prejudice. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. quash proceedings due to delay and procedural violations post-retirement. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. Sisir Kumar Ratho, Member(A))
This OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following reliefs:-
i. Memorandum of Charges issued by Deputy Secretary, under the authority of R1 dated 07.12.2012.
ii. Memorandum No. C-13011/51/2011-Viq issued by the Under Secretary, under the authority of the President of India dated 06.05.2015.
iii. Order No. C-13011/51/2011-Vig issued by the Under Secretary, under the authority of the President of India dated 14.12.2018 conveying tentative disagreement on the Article 1 of the Articles of Charges that was held not proved by the IA and tentatively agreeing with the other charges held to be proved.
iv. Order No. C-13011/51/2011-Vigilance Issued by the Under Secretary, under the authority of the President of India dated 22.06.201
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
