AI Overview...

Mahesh Kumar Mishra - Main points and insights:
In multiple cases (e.g., 2000 (3) SCC 450), the Supreme Court emphasized that courts can interfere with disciplinary punishments only if they are shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct (e.g., State Road Transport Corporation case) Tej Ram VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh, Ramesh Singh VS Chairman, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation - Allahabad.
The Court has consistently held that punishment should not be interfered with unless it is wholly disproportionate, aligning with principles established in cases like Ashok Kumar Arora (1997 SCC 72) Tej Ram VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh, Regional Manager, U. P. S. R. T. C. Etawah VS Hoti Lal - Supreme Court.
Mishra's cases involve issues of disciplinary actions, punishment severity, and legal remedies available to employees or individuals subjected to such punishments Tej Ram VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh, Ramesh Singh VS Chairman, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation - Allahabad.
Several judgments refer to the importance of proportionality in disciplinary proceedings and the limited scope of judicial review Tej Ram VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh, Ramesh Singh VS Chairman, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation - Allahabad.
Mahesh Kumar Mishra - Analysis and Conclusion:
The jurisprudence indicates that Mahesh Kumar Mishra's cases primarily revolve around the legality and proportionality of disciplinary punishments, with courts advocating restraint unless punishments are grossly disproportionate.
The consistent judicial stance underscores the importance of maintaining disciplinary authority while safeguarding individuals from arbitrary or excessive punishment.
The cases cited demonstrate a pattern of judicial review limited to ensuring fairness and proportionality, reinforcing the principle that punishment should be commensurate with misconduct Tej Ram VS State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh, Ramesh Singh VS Chairman, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation - Allahabad.
Additional references:
Several cases involving Mahesh Kumar Mishra (e.g., 2000 (1) LBESR 1060, JT 2000 (3) SC 173) highlight the Supreme Court's approach to disciplinary actions and the limits of judicial intervention [RAJ NET CHAUHAN
VS STATE OF U P
Allahabad](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02500043496).
Cases like V.K. Saraf and others (1989 SCC 173) and Rama Dhondu Borade (1973 SCC 476) reinforce the jurisprudence on judicial review of disciplinary measures P. Muthukumaran VS Secretary to the Govt. , Dept. Of Consumer Affairs - Madras, Mani alias Karuppasamy VS Secretary to Government - Madras.
Recent cases (e.g., 2022 petitions) involve legal proceedings related to disciplinary or administrative matters involving Mahesh Kumar and others, with courts examining interim reliefs and procedural aspects ALOK KUMAR SAXENA @ MAHESH KUMAR AND 3 OTHERS Vs State - Allahabad, MAHESH KUMAR AND 3 OTHERS vs State of U.P. AND ANOTHER - Allahabad, MAHESH KUMAR AND 3 OTHERS Vs State - Allahabad.

Summary:
Mahesh Kumar Mishra's legal cases predominantly concern the legality and proportionality of disciplinary punishments. The Supreme Court's consistent stance is that judicial intervention is limited to cases of gross disproportion, emphasizing the importance of maintaining disciplinary authority while protecting individual rights. These principles are evident across multiple judgments involving Mishra and others, underscoring the judiciary's role in balancing authority and fairness.

Search Results for "Mahesh Kumar and 3 Others"

2011 0 Supreme(HP) 1698 • India - Himachal Pradesh

V.K.SHARMA

Mahesh Kumar Mishra and others (2000) 3 Supreme Court Cases, 450, Director General, RPF and others vs. Ch. ... Makwana and Union Bank of India and others, 1985 (2) LLJ, 296, U.P. State Road Transport Corpn and others vs. ... State Road Transport Corpn and others vs. Mahesh Kumar Mishra and others (2000) 3 Supreme Court Cases, 450, paras 7 to 9 whereof being relevant are extracted....

2003 0 Supreme(All) 1193 • India - Allahabad

A.K.YOG, UMESHWAR PANDEY

Mahesh Kumar Mishra & others, reported in 2000 (1) LBESR 1060 (SC) : JT 2000 (3) SC 173 - State of Punjab and others v. ... The Commissioner of Police and others, reported in 1999 (1) ESC 339 (SC) and U. P. State Road Transport Corporation & others v. ... Mahesh Kumar Mishra & others, reported in 2000 (1) LBESR 1060 (SC) : JT 2000 (3) SC 173, he has further emphasized that the award of punishment ....

Regional Manager, U. P. S. R. T. C. Etawah VS Hoti Lal

2003 0 Supreme(SC) 168 • India - Supreme Court

ARIJIT PASAYAT, SHIVARAJ V.PATIL

In Om Kumar and others vs. ... Mahesh Kumar Mishra and others (2000 (3) SCC 450) . ... 5. The scope of interference with the punishment awarded has been dealt with by this Court in several cases. ... Ashok Kumar Arora (1997 (3) SCC 72) that the Court will not intervene unless the punishment is wholly disproportionate. ... Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submitted that in the employers own case in case of anothe....

P. Muthukumaran VS Secretary to the Govt. , Dept. Of Consumer Affairs

2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 1709 • India - Madras

M.JAICHANDREN, M.M.SUNDRESH

State of West Bengal (1970 (1) SCC 219), Mahesh Kumar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. ... Union of India & Others (1990) 3 SCC 148, Rama Dhondu Borade Vs. ... V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police and Others (1989) 3 SCC 173, Sumaiya Vs. ... The Supreme Court, in Mahesh Kumar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. ... State of Rajasthan and Others, 1980 (2) SCC 321 and Raghavendra Singh v. ... V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police and Others, (1....

ALOK KUMAR SAXENA @ MAHESH KUMAR AND 3 OTHERS Vs State

• India - Allahabad High Court

RAJ BEER SINGH

. - 6392 of 2021 Applicant :- Alok Kumar Saxena @ Mahesh Kumar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Pandey ... Alok Kumar Saxena alias Mahesh Kumar and others), under Sections 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (da) SC/ST Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Shahjahnpur, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions ... In well ....

MAHESH KUMAR AND 3 OTHERS vs State of U.P. AND ANOTHER

• India - Allahabad High Court

. - 8610 of 2022 Appellant :- Mahesh Kumar And 3 Others ... 1) da, dha and 3(2) (Va) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Jariya, District- No. 0164/2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3( ... laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Sharad/- Digitally signed by SHARAD KUMAR

Mani alias Karuppasamy VS Secretary to Government

2013 0 Supreme(Mad) 220 • India - Madras

M.JAICHANDREN, S.NAGAMUTHU

Mahesh Kumar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. Union of India & Others, (1990) 3 SCC 148, 11. Rama Dhondu Borade Vs. ... State of West Bengal, reported in, 1973 (3) SCC 476, 19. Ram Sukrya Mhatre v. R.D.Tyagi and Others, 1992 Supp (3) SCC 65, 20. ... V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police and Others, (1989) 3 SCC 173, 12. Venkatesan @ Maya Venkatesan (2007(1) MLJ (Crl.) 1176), 13. ... The Supreme Court, in Mahesh Kumar#....

Ramesh Singh VS Chairman, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation

2004 0 Supreme(All) 2453 • India - Allahabad

VINEET SARAN

Mahesh Kumar Mishra] Fact of the Case: The Petitioner, a conductor in the U.P. ... State Road Transport Corporation and Others Vs. ... Mahesh Kumar Mishra and Others, (2000) 3 SCC 450, wherein it has been held that in case if the punishment awarded was shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct of which the employee was found guilty, the Courts could interfere with the quantum of punishment. ... State Road Transport Corporation and Others Vs. .......

Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee through its Registrar VS Pankaj Kumar

2019 0 Supreme(UK) 103 • India - Uttarakhand

RAMESH RANGANATHAN, R.C.KHULBE

Veena Chaturvedi and others, (2005) 3 SCC 79 - Canara Bank and another Vs. M. Mahesh Kumar, (2015) 7 SCC 412 - V. ... Raj Kumar, (2010) 11 SCC 661 - Indian Literacy Board and others Vs. ... State of Andhra Pradesh and others, (2008) 13 SCC 730 - Sushma Gosain vs. ... Mahesh Kumar, (2015) 7 SCC 412 on the one hand, and MGB Gramin Bank Vs. Chakarvarti Singh, (2014) 13 SCC 583 and State Bank of India & Others Vs. ... ....

• India - Allahabad High Court

SALIL KUMAR RAI

. - 1697 of 2022 Petitioner :- Mahesh Kumar And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. ... State of UP and others). ... And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Uma Nath Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J. ... Kumar and ot hers Vs. ... Judge (Junior Division), Bulandshahar to decide the temporary injunction application no. 6-C2 of the petitioners filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC, read with Section 151 CP....

Filter by Legal Phrase

Legal Issues on Supreme Today AI

Approbate and Reprobate: Key Legal Doctrine Explained Vague Threatening Phone Calls: Why They Fail in Court Does SCC Own Copyright on Full Text Judgments? G.O. Ms No. 108: TN Salesman & Packer Recruitment Rules Article 226 vs 227: Key Differences in High Court Powers Judgments on One-Time GNA Charges in India TIP: Judicial vs Executive Magistrate Rules Explained Can a Sole Dissenting Member Block Society Redevelopment? How to Sue Fake Facebook Accounts for Defamation in India Illustrations: Person Dominating Will in Indian Law Perusal in Court Orders: What It Means in Law Litigant Vigilance: Essential Duty in Court Proceedings What to Do If Company Suit Signatory Dies Renting House Without Rent Agreement in India: Risks Stay on Money Realization After Ejectment: Is It Possible?