Dismissal and Removal - Distinction - Held, dismissal ordinarily disqualifies a person from future employment but
removal does not,
State of Uttarakhand v. Yogendra Nath Arora, (2013) 14 SCC 299
Criminal Law
Public Accountability, Vigilance and Prevention of Corruption
Ss. 7, 19(1)(c) r/w Ss. 13(1)(d) & 13(2) - Expression removal from office occurring in S. 19(1)(c) - Repatriation, held, is
not removal from office for purposes of S. 19(1)(c) - Sanction for prosecution - Appropriate authority - Held, is thus not
repatriating authority but authority to which employee is repatriated - Office means a position which requires person
holding it to perform certain duties and discharge certain obligations and removal from his office means to snap that tie
permanently - By repatriation, person holding office on deputation may not be required to perform that duty and
discharge obligation of that office, but nonetheless he continues to hold office and by virtue thereof performs certain
other duties and discharge certain other obligations - Thus, power to repatriate does not embrace within itself power of
removal from office as envisaged under S. 19(1)(c) - Hence, repatriating authority is not the authority with power of
removal from office - On facts thus held, accused being an employee of an undertaking of State Government of Uttar
Pradesh and having been repatriated to his parent department, it was State of Uttar Pradesh which was competent to
remove him and thus to grant necessary sanction and not repatriating authority i.e. State of Uttarakhand - Impugned
judgment finding that sanction accorded by State of Uttarakhand was not a valid sanction and hence, quashing
prosecution initiated against respondent accused calls for no interference,
Dismissal/Removal
Dismissal and Removal - Distinction - Held, dismissal ordinarily disqualifies a person from future employment but
removal does not,
Print Page
removal does not,
State of Uttarakhand v. Yogendra Nath Arora, (2013) 14 SCC 299
Criminal Law
Public Accountability, Vigilance and Prevention of Corruption
Ss. 7, 19(1)(c) r/w Ss. 13(1)(d) & 13(2) - Expression removal from office occurring in S. 19(1)(c) - Repatriation, held, is
not removal from office for purposes of S. 19(1)(c) - Sanction for prosecution - Appropriate authority - Held, is thus not
repatriating authority but authority to which employee is repatriated - Office means a position which requires person
holding it to perform certain duties and discharge certain obligations and removal from his office means to snap that tie
permanently - By repatriation, person holding office on deputation may not be required to perform that duty and
discharge obligation of that office, but nonetheless he continues to hold office and by virtue thereof performs certain
other duties and discharge certain other obligations - Thus, power to repatriate does not embrace within itself power of
removal from office as envisaged under S. 19(1)(c) - Hence, repatriating authority is not the authority with power of
removal from office - On facts thus held, accused being an employee of an undertaking of State Government of Uttar
Pradesh and having been repatriated to his parent department, it was State of Uttar Pradesh which was competent to
remove him and thus to grant necessary sanction and not repatriating authority i.e. State of Uttarakhand - Impugned
judgment finding that sanction accorded by State of Uttarakhand was not a valid sanction and hence, quashing
prosecution initiated against respondent accused calls for no interference,
Dismissal/Removal
Dismissal and Removal - Distinction - Held, dismissal ordinarily disqualifies a person from future employment but
removal does not,
No comments:
Post a Comment