Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KESAR SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Kesar Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors - RSA-3003-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 737 (14 February 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Case No. : C.M.No.9306-C of 2005 and

R.S.A.No.3003 of 2004

Date of Decision : January 27, 2006.

Kesar Singh .... Appellant

Vs.

State of Punjab & others .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice Viney Mittal.

* * *

Present : Mr.Sarabjit Singh, Advocate

for the appellant.

JUDGMENT :

For the reasons stated in the application, the order dated August 19, 2005 is recalled. The main case is restored back to its original number.

The plaintiff having concurrently lost before the two courts below, has approached this Court through the present appeal.

He filed suit for declaration claiming that the order dated January 18, 1999 for recovery of Rs.77926.54 was illegal, bad and not binding.

The defendants claimed that inquiry had been conducted against the plaintiff, after he was duly charge-sheeted. The inquiry was conducted as per rules and thereafter punishment was awarded by the competent authority, relying upon the said inquiry report.

The learned trial court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff.

It was held that the inquiry had been conducted as per the rules and regulations and nothing was shown by the plaintiff that there was any violation of the same. The appeal filed by the plaintiff was also dismissed.

Similar findings were recorded by the learned first appellate court.

It is well settled law that a Civil Court cannot sit in appeal over the inquiry proceedings or the punishment awarded 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.

C.M.No.9306-C of 2005 and : 2 :

R.S.A.No.3003 of 2004

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

Dismissed.

January 27, 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.