Adv Haresh A. Raichura

June 2, 2014

President can dismiss even Secretary level employees without any inquiry. Art.311(2)(c) : SC

It is possible that it may come to knowledge of Government that certain Secretary Level person is acting against the interest of government.

Normal rule is of holding an inquiry and dismiss him after inquiry.

But there may be situations when setting up inquiry may not be advisable or possible.

In such cases, even without inquiry, President is empowered to dismiss concerned a Secretary from service under Art. 311(2)(c).

For more reference, plz see SC judgement dated 30.3.2011 in C.A. No. 2797 of 2011

Haresh Raichura
2/6/2014

June 1, 2014

Trapped in a Bank's Debt Recovery Case? Remember, no appeal unless you deposit 25% upfront

Debt recovery laws are very strict. The Banks have special adjudicating debt recovery tribunals where such cases are tried.

Once the judgement is passed, a debtor may want to appeal to Appellate tribunal.

But here there is problem.

At the time of filing appeal, debtor has to deposit 50% of amount.

In Special cases, Tribunal may reduce such deposit to 25%.

But in no case, it can totally wave deposit. Appeal is not maintainable unless deposit is made.

For more reference, please check judgement of Supreme Court dated 18/3/2011 in case of N C G versus UCO Bank.

Haresh Raichura

1/6/2014

For oral interviews for jobs / promotions in Govt Depts? How many marks? 50%, 33%, 25%, 22%, 15%? 10%? Legal?

In Nagmani Case, 25% held not excessive. 2009 5 SCC 515

In Kiran Gupta case, 15% held not excessive. 2000 7 SCC 719

In Ashok Kumar Case, 22.2% was considered excessive and arbitrary. 1992 1 SCC 28

In Ajay Hasia case, 33.3% was held arbitrary. 1981 1 SCC 722

In Minor A Peeriakaruppan, 75 marks for oral interview out of total 275 was held arbitrary. 1971 1 SCC 38

In Nishi Magnu case 50 marks for oral interview out of total 150 marks was held arbitrary. 1980 4 SCC 95

In Mohinder Sain Garg Case, 25% was held excessive 1991 1 SCC 662

In P. Mohanan Pillai Case, 50% was held excessive 2007 9 SCC 497

Summarily : Excessive marks allocated for oral interviews for appointments or for promotions makes the whole process arbitrary. It becomes breeding ground for corruption.

10% for oral interview is ideal.