Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MAHAVIR PRASAD MEENA versus U O I & ORS

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MAHAVIR PRASAD MEENA v U O I & ORS - CW Case No. 1994 of 2006 [2006] RD-RJ 441 (21 March 2006)

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1994/06

Mahavir Prasad Meena Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.

Date of Order : 21/03/2006

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi

Mr. Mukesh Agrawal, for petitioner

The petitioner while holding the post of Head

Constable in the Railway Protection Force at

Phulera, was charge sheeted for misconduct on 8th

December, 1989. In the inquiry, he was found guilty of molesting a woman in a drunken state. As a consequence thereof, he was dismissed from service dt.15th vide order May, 1990. Against which, he approached this court, but the order of penalty has been upheld and attained finality.

Counsel for petitioner contends that even if dismissal has been upheld by this court, still his right of compassionate allowance in terms of Rule 65 of Railway Services [Pension] Rules, 1993 has not been considered by the respondents.

In my opinion, it is the discretion of the authority while passing the order of dismissal or removal from service may consider for grant of compassionate allowance. Looking to the nature of charge found proved against petitioner which was made to be basis for passing the order of dismissal from service. I do not find any justification to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of compassionate allowance in exercise of Rule 65 of the Rules.

Counsel further submits that the amount, which has been deposited with the Provident Fund

Commissioner despite representation, has not been released so far and it has been brought to my notice that representation was submitted on 12th November, 2005. In my opinion, if any amount towards provident fund is due, the petitioner will be at liberty to make further representation or legal notice for demand of justice to the concerned authority, who will decide the same in accordance with law.

With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. [Ajay Rastogi],J.

FRB


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.