Judgments - Service Law / Matter , Provident Funds
Indian Bank and another Versus Mahaveer Khariwal
Jagdish Singh Jatav vs. State of MP and Others
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. Versus SMT. SURESHWATI
SH. N.K. MADHOK VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
State of M.P. & another Vs. Vishnu Prasad Maran & another
Law laid down - [1] Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypith Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 - The Writ Court has taken a plausible view. No interference is warranted. Even if another view is possible, it cannot be a ground for interference. [2] The Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 – Rule 10 – The punishment of “Censure”. The punishment enlisted in Rule 10 can be imposed on “existing government servants”. The said punishment cannot Full Judgment
BALWAN SINGH & ANR VERSUS MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS & ANR
MOHAMMAD MOKARAM VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR
SHARAD KUMAR SINHA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR
RAMDULAR SINGH & ANR VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
KRISHNA KANT YADAV VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS VERSUS RAMESH KUMAR RAJPUT
AVINASH KISHORE SAHAY VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS VERSUS V.P. MUNGHATE AND ORS
Dr. Chandramani Mishra Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & others
Law laid down - If the Disciplinary Authority proceeds under Rule 14 of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966, then it does not mean that the Authority can only impose major penalty, but it can be culminate into a minor penalty too. Full Judgment