HARE KRISHNA YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF MICRO, SMALL & MEDIUM ENTERPRISES, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-Commission.

(2.) Submission is made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the provisions of Regulation 3 ((1) (i) (ii) (iii) of the KVIC Regulations, 2003 came into existence much subsequent to the alleged occurrence, which is for the period between 1996 to 1998, he could not have been punished for violation of the said KVIC Regulations, 2003. the provisions are being reproduced herein for the sake of reference:

(3.) The said provisions are general provisions and only mandate that the employees have to maintain integrity, devotion to duty and not do anything which is unbecoming of an employee. The said requirements in public employment is implicit in any Rule, even if not specified. Even because of the fact that the same has been specified in the year 2003, the petitioner cannot escape the said requirement if he is in public employment.