1000 TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -241
941. “Reasons to be given if Disciplinary Authority disagrees with the findings of the inquiry officer”
[Ashok Kumar V Commissioner of Police (1992) 19 ATC 587 (Delhi) DOJ 16-08-1991]
941. “Reasons to be given if Disciplinary Authority disagrees with the findings of the inquiry officer”
[Ashok Kumar V Commissioner of Police (1992) 19 ATC 587 (Delhi) DOJ 16-08-1991]
942. “Non examination of the person whose letter has been relied upon- serious lacuna vitiating the entire proceedings”
[Hari Giri V UOI (1992) 19 ATC 659 (Delhi) DOJ 26-07-1991]
943. “Non examination of bribe given vitiates the proceedings”
[Sarala Devi. Smt V Commissioner of Police ATR 1992(1) CAT 648 (PB New Delhi) DOJ 10-02-1992]
944. “Request of the delinquent to be represented by a legal practitioner of his choice cannot be rejected by a cryptic, non speaking order”.
[DR. Raghunadhaman opeh V UOI & anr 1992(3) SLJ (CAT) 372 (PB New Delhi) DOJ 16-04-1992]
945. “When admission of guilt is clear and unambiguous, inquiry may be dispensed with”
[Taraknath Banerjee V UOI 1992(2) ATJ 77 (Calcutta) DOJ 25-11-1991]
Post a Comment