Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SANTOSH RANI versus PUNJAB STATE

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Santosh Rani v. Punjab State - RSA-1907-2002 [2006] RD-P&H 359 (24 January 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Case No. : R.S.A.No.1907 of 2002

Date of Decision : February 14, 2006.

Santosh Rani .... Appellant

Vs.

Punjab State .... Respondent

Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice Viney Mittal.

* * *

Present : Mr.Surinder Sharma, Advocate

for the appellant.

Mr.D.S.Jandiala, Addl.A.G., Punjab

for the respondent.

JUDGMENT :

The legal representative of original plaintiff Tirath Ram is in appeal.

The plaintiff was working as Patwari and was ordered to be dismissed from service vide order dated February 15, 1977. His appeal failed before the Financial Commissioner on November 08, 1982. He challenged the aforesaid two orders claiming that these orders were illegal bad, null and void and not binding upon his rights and the plaintiff was still to be treated to be continuing in service.

Both the courts below have found it as a fact that the plaintiff had been charge-sheeted for having interpolated with the revenue record.

Thereafter, a regular departmental inquiry was held against him. The charges levelled against him were proved. Thereafter, the competent authority passed the order of punishment. The appeal filed by the plaintiff failed before the Financial Commissioner as well. Consequently, the trial court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff and appeal filed by him also failed.

R.S.A.No.1907 of 2002 : 2 :

It is well settled that a civil court can not sit in appeal over the inquiry proceedings, nor can interfere in the order of punishment passed by the competent authority.

Nothing has been shown that the findings recorded by both the courts below suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to the record.

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

Dismissed.

February 14, 2006 ( VINEY MITTAL )

monika 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.