Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VINEY KUMAR versus HARYANA STATE & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Viney Kumar v. Haryana State & Anr - RSA-618-2001 [2006] RD-P&H 1071 (22 February 2006)

IN THE COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA NO.618 of 2001

DATE OF DECISION:February 28,2006

Viney Kumar

....Appellant

VERSUS

Haryana State and another

.....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
PRESENT: Shri Sushil Bhardwaj, Advocate for the appellant.

Shri D.S.Nalwa, DAG, Haryana.

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

The plaintiff having concurrently lost before the two Courts below has approached this Court through the present Regular Second Appeal.

The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration challenging the order dated May 12,1997 passed by defendant No.2, General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Karnal whereby his salary was fixed at the minimum pay scale for a period of four years.

The facts which emerge from the record that the plaintiff was posted as driver with Haryana Roadways. He was charge sheeted under Rule 7 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal), Rules 1987.

The suit was contested by the defendants. It was claimed that while passing the punishments orders, procedure and the rules had been duly followed.

Both the Courts below have concurrently held that no evidence had been led by the plaintiff to show that the departmental rules/procedure had not been followed while passing the punishment orders. Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed and his appeal failed before the learned First Appellate Court.

It is well settled that a Civil Court cannot sit in appeal over the departmental proceedings or the punishment orders passed by the a competent authority.

Nothing has been shown that the findings of fact recorded by the learned Courts below suffer from any infirmity or contrary to the record.

No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal.

Dismissed.

February 28, 2006 (Viney Mittal)

KD Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.