REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

STATE OF U.P Appellant

V/S

Rakesh Kant Sama Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

U.P. RAJYAKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM VS. VIJAY KUMARSHUKAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BRAHM DATT SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. BANI SINGH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ASHOK KACKER [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR ECIL HYDERABAD VS. B KARUNAKAR [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT VS. L SRINIVASAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. N RADHAKISHAN [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK CHIEF PERSONNEL DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. KUNJ BEHARI MISRA:SHANTI PRASAD GOEL [REFERRED TO]
HIRAN MAYEE BHATTACHARYYA V. SECRETARY,S.M. SCHOOL FOR GIRLS AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
U P STATE SPINNING CO LTD VS. R S PANDEY [REFERRED TO]
M V BIJLANI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. KUNISETTY SATYANARAYANA [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR SONKAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. Y S SADHU [REFERRED TO]
FIDA HUSSAIN VS. MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY MIN OF DEFENCE VS. PRABHASH CHANDRA MIRDHA [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN, LIC OF INDIA VS. A. MASILAMANI [REFERRED TO]
DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GAUHATI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. VS. RAM NAGINA YADAV [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD. VS. S. BALAKRISHNAN [REFERRED TO]
ALLAHABAD BANK & ORS. VS. KRISHNA NARAYAN TEWARI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Pankaj Nath, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel, Sri Prafulla Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Dr. L.P. Misra, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and perused the record.

(2.) Sri Pankaj Nath, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel while challenging the impugned judgment passed by Tribunal submitted that respondent No. 1/Sri Rakesh Kant Sam was appointed on the post of Entertainment Tax Officer Grade-II on 03.01.1983 and subsequently was promoted to the post of Entertainment Tax Officer Grade-I in the year 1989. On 01.06.1996 the respondent no.1 was further promoted on the post of District Entertainment Tax Officer. While working as District Entertainment Tax Officer, Aligarh, the respondent no.1 was placed under suspension vide order dated 01.06.2009 and thereafter a charge-sheet dated 21.08.2009 was served upon him, leveling three charges.

(3.) On 31.12.2009, respondent No. 1 submitted a detailed reply denying all the charges leveled on him. After conducting enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted the enquiry report dated 29.01.2011 wherein the charges leveled against respondent No. 1 were found to be proved.

Click here to view full judgment.

STATE OF U.P Vs. RAKESH KANT SAMA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address