neeru
26 May 2015 at 05:38
Respected Sirs,
I had earlier posted a query. Only comment i got was that it was "too long a query"
In short I am furnishing a link to the judgement passed while dismissing my writ. The major issues are as under:
http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/VJM/judgement/12-05-2015/VJM07052015CW52082008.pdf
Para 6 of the judgement
The charge sheet was modified at the instance of Inquiry officer appointed by CVC. Since there was no charge of corruption, CVC did not have jurisdiction to inquire into. However, by inducting the word misconduct at the instance of IO. My point is that IO had no authority to direct the bank for modifing the Charge sheet. Secondly, he mentioned in his order that a seperate letter was being written was behind my back. That letter was never shown to me.
Para 10 onward
Bank sought CVC advice. It is wrong to say that I have argued that there is no provision in CVC (perhaps it is SIDBI, my organisation) regulation to seek advice. There is provision that in case of charges of corruption, Bank will consult CVC. However there was no charge of corruption therefore bank was wrong in consulting CVC.
Besides, several other major and important issues are not discussed in the judgement.
These are as under:
I was only advised through a letter about the punishment and it was implemented. No order of the DA was given.
Neither first stage nor second stage advice of CVC was shared with me Bank has categorily said in its reply that i had no right to get the copy of cvc advice. Further, it has stated that 'although the Bank has pleaded for leniency in the matter', which imply that they were compelled to impose the punishment on me.
Since i had appeared in person and presented my case i had submitted written arguments with so many case laws, particularly, D C Sharma v/s state bank of india and nagraj karjagi V/s syndicate bank.Besides, the cvc guidelines on providing first and second stage advice.
There so many other issues which i will not mention here. the major issues have been discussed above.
Respected sirs, I seek your advice.
Fareed Ahmed Sunkad
24 May 2015 at 11:22
Respected Sir, i want to know whether a TRUSTEE of EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION can be a EMPLOYEE (LECTURER) in same EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.
ram mohan
14 May 2015 at 22:39
I had filed an SLP through efiling section in Supreme court againist an oeder by High court, and had ben allotted a dairy number, but SLP is in defective curative stage in registry of SCI. Now I want to with the SLP and to file reveiew petition in high court itself. I want to how to withdram my petition. as SLP is in Defective curative stage, it it necessary to withdraw, or not
MOHAN SINGH ROHILLA
11 May 2015 at 21:54
For becoming minister of state MP or MLA is first condition?
Milap Choraria
05 May 2015 at 17:25
I am going to file a Writ Petition against Central Vigilance Commission and three other public authorities, because an Vigilance Inquiry is conducted after its direction and found that corruption is involved in the matter. But CVC is ignoring to take further action on flimsy grounds that the matter is old one. In the Writ Petition three Private Parties to be made as Respondents. Please advice me whether I have to serve Advance copy of the Petition to all the 7 Respondents or only 4 Government Authorities.
P. Venu
05 May 2015 at 12:42
This topic was earlier posted in the Forum to elicit discussion on the questions of law involved. However, it appears, the topic remained unnoticed by the learned experts, other than Shri Vashista. Hence the matter is posted as a Query:
In a Departmental Inquiry (Disciplinary Proceedings) under CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 the Inquiry proceedings had been completed by the first week of December 2014 and the Presenting and Charged officers have submitted their written briefs to the Inquiry Officer by the end of Decmber 2014 and second week of January 2015 respectively. The only task remaining has been the submission of Iquiry Report, which in the normal course should have completed within a period of three months i.e. by the second week of April.
However, the Disciplinary Authority, by the Order dated 23rd April has appointed another Inquiry Officer citing the reason that the Original Inquiry Officer could not complete the Inquiry due to the completion of tenure in the Department before the final report could be prepared.
The Order is strange in more than one way: it does not cancel or rescind the appointment of the First Inquiry Officer nor is a copy of this Order endorsed to him. Secondly, the completion of the tenure has not been a new development. It was well known that his tenure was to complete on 16th January. Surprisingly, the new Inquiry Officer has been appointed more than three months thereafter. All that the new Inquiry Officer has to do is to prepare the final report.
Is the appointment of the new IO said to lawful or legally required?
Can the inquiry report prepared by the new IO said to be accordance with the provisions of Article 311?
Is not the new development repugnant to the provisions of CCS(CCA) Rules and discipline of the Constitution?
Devnandan Sharma
02 May 2015 at 22:17
A reference under Article 317(1) of the Constitution was made by the President of India in June, 2007. The case was listed first in January, 2008. The charges on which inquiry has to be conducted were approved in September, 2010. Recording of evidence and cross-examination of witnesses were finished in February, 2013. On 01.10.2013, after resolving issues regarding transcription of documents filed during evidence, the Hon’ble Registrar issued directions for listing the case before the hearing bench as per rules. The case was listed on 07.02.2014, 05.03.2014, 09.04.2014, 15.07.2014, 16.09.2014, and 11.11.2014, but the same was adjourned without any material progress; on two occasions, the case has to be adjourned due to non-appearance of the concerned Counsel of the opposite side, and on one occasion, the case was simply adjourned without any reason. On 16.09.2014, the opposite sides persuaded for declaring the case infructuous, but due to opposition from my side, the Hon’ble Court directed that it has to be decided on merits. 11.11.2014 was fixed for the next hearing. On that day, again the opposite parties sought adjournment due to non-availability of their Advocate.
After that the case became traceless. In January, 2015 it was indicated that the case is likely to be listed on 24.03.2015. Before 10 days, it was indicated that the case is likely to be listed on 31.03.2015. This trend continues till now. My Counsel mentioned for fixing the date, but that yielded no result, and at present it has been informed that the case is likely to be listed on 07.07.2015. I am more than 65 years of age and about eight precious years of my life has been spoiled.
Is there any effective remedy for this kind of distress? Should I write directly to H.E. the President of India to request Hon’ble CJI for early disposal of the case which was initiated by His Excellency? Or may I write directly to Hon’ble CJI?
Sanjeet Kumar
02 May 2015 at 16:21
Brief Facts of the Case:
i) M/s Company X is a Public Sector Unit with Nine Production Units. In addition, Company X has established two Laboratories Y for R&D purpose. The executives of Y constitutes a Separate Cadre and are governed by separate Service Rules. In Short, the Service Rules for executives of X and executives of Y are substantially different. In fact, the service benefits of executives of Y are much superior to the service benefits of executives of X.
ii) In October 2010, I was appointed as Member (Research Staff) and was posted to Y. Subsequently, in January 2014, I was transferred from the post of Member (Research Staff), Pay Scale 16,400 – 50,500, in Y to the post of Deputy Engineer, Pay Scale 16,400 – 40,500, in Production Unit of X. In this way my Cadre and Service Rules was changed by means of Transfer. I was transferred and relieved within a day without any exigency. Since I was relieved within a day, in the interest of discipline I had complied with the transfer order and joined duty as a Deputy Engineer.
iii) Having my service condition altered substantially, I challenged the validity of Transfer Order through a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High Court in May 2014. In October 2014, Hon’ble Court had issued Rule/admitted WP.
iv) Subsequently, I moved Interlocutory Application for Interim Order of Stay of the transfer order. In that IA, I had prayed for grant of interim order of stay of the transfer order and permission to rejoin duty as a Member (Research Staff) in Y. This was what the final relief sought.
v) In December 2014, Hon’ble Court was pleased to allow the IA and had granted the interim order of Stay of the transfer order with observation that “the transfer order is illegal, ex-facie and thus calls for interference”. That means, the Hon’ble Court had granted the interim relief which tantamount to the final relief.
vi) Subsequently, I sent four representations to the CMD and requested to comply with the Interim Order. The Company has not responded for any of my representations.
vii) Having no other option, I filed Contempt Petition (Civil) in March 2015. Hon’ble Court has ordered notice.
viii) After filing the Contempt Petition, I came to know that on in January 2015, the company filed the Writ Appeal and has also moved IA for Stay of Interim Oder. But Company has never requested for hearing of IA and so the Appeal has not been posted for hearing even once. That means, company has not taken Stay of Interim Order.
Queries:
1) As mentioned above, I was transferred and relieved within a day, so I had complied with the transfer order in the interest of discipline. Having complied with the transfer order and then filed WP and got interim order of Stay of transfer order, what is the legal validity and effect of Interim Order of Stay of transfer order?
2) In my IA for Stay, I had only prayer that Interim Order of Stay of transfer order to be granted and I shall be permitted to join duty as Member (Research Staff) in Y. The Hon’ble Court has fully allowed the IA and ordered the Interim Order of Stay of Transfer Order but has not specifically mentioned that I shall be permitted to join duty as Member (Research Staff) in Y. Since the IA has been fully allowed, does the Interim Order mean that I shall be permitted to join duty as Member (Research Staff) in Y?
3) Since the company has filed Appeal but has not taken Stay of the Interim Order, what is the legal validity and effect of the Contempt Petition?
4) The Company has filed the Appeal but has not requested for hearing even once. The company has not communicated the same to me even after submitting four requests to comply with the Interim order. That means the company has been simply waiting for the contempt petition to be moved. In this background, what is the propriety or legal validity of the Appeal?
Kindly reply to all of the queries pointwise. I also request you to kindly provide the reference of Supreme Court decisions or any other established law in support of your answer. I will be thankful to you.
Ashok
29 April 2015 at 14:23
Sirs,
We had given an application and proposal to MCGM,K west - Andheri West, Mumbai for installing street lights on November,2013. Its a social cause and related to general public, multiple reminders and visits been made to officers concerned for the same and asked/written to all appropriate authorities till the rank of Additional Municipal Commissioner - MCGM. No any action, all went in vain.
Nothing been working out due to MCGM employees lax attitude towards basic concern. Even we had provided them with the Map of the location where street lights are required and said road comes under MCGM.
Is there any Constitutional Law which can used to remind that its their duty to expedite the requirement of common people.
Would request all the experts to advice us on the above mentioned.
Regards,
Ashok P
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Human rights
WHAT ARE WRITES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA?