Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Calcutta High Court found no violation of natural justice and emphasised that it cannot re-appreciate evidence in the exercise of judicial review.
Calcutta High Court observed that there exists lack of correlation between evidence and charges, failure to address the petitioner’s defense, and overlooking crucial factors.
“The Tribunal apparently failed to appreciate that the calculations made by the respondents overlooked proviso (b) to Rule 6 as well as Rule 8 of the Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 and commutation value expressed as number of years of purchase, prejudicial to the petitioner cannot be applied.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Supreme Court said that prior approval of the Director of Education is mandatory as per Section 18 of the Rajasthan Non-Governmental Educational Institutions Act, 1989, on termination after the disciplinary proceedings.
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Ajay Mohan Goel J., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are that
Uttaranchal High Court: Manoj K. Tiwari, J. contemplated a writ petition filed against the impugned order, where the request of the petitioner
Tripura High Court: Arindam Lodh, J., while highly depreciating the conduct of the State Public Works Department, directed it to conclude the disciplinary
Patna High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Mohit Kumar Shah, J. dismissed a writ petition on grounds of petitioner being
Central Information Commission: The appellant had requested the following information regarding the disciplinary case against him, from the CPIO, Dept. Of Posts: 1.
Supreme Court: In the matter where the Court was deciding the question as to whether disciplinary proceedings can be initiated before the