HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN,J, SUSHIL KUKREJA,J
ASHWANI KUMAR JOSHI – Appellant
Versus
HP STATE INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORP. LTD. – Respondent
ORDER
(Annexure A-9) dated 15.11.2016, as also the decision on Item No. 201.12 taken in meeting of BOD on 30.09.2016 (Annexure A-8), also as the order dated 24.07.2015 (Annexure A-4) and the order dated 30.01.2019 (Annexure A-13) may very kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of law and justice.
2. That respondents may very kindly directed to refund the entire amount be of recovery which has already been recovered from the applicant to the tune of Rs. 1,20,859/- with interest @9% per annum in the interest of law and justice.”
8 Since these are the admitted facts and the respondents have not controverted the same, therefore, we have proceeded to hear the matter.
9 Evidently, there has been blatant violation of Rule 15 of CCS (CCA) Rules when the disciplinary authority failed to follow the procedure as prescribed under sub Rules 1 and 2 thereof, which provide for as under:-
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.