<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1998 (8) TMI 594 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166229</link>
    <description>In disciplinary proceedings under bank regulations, where the disciplinary authority retains final fact-finding and penal power, natural justice requires notice of tentative disagreement with a favourable inquiry report before adverse findings are recorded. The authority must record its reasons for disagreement and give the delinquent officer a real opportunity to represent on the proposed reversal. The Court treated this stage as part of the first and decisive stage of the disciplinary process and disapproved contrary views that no further opportunity was needed. The appeals failed, and the orders setting aside the penalties and directing release of retirement benefits were affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2014 19:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 594 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166229</link>
      <description>In disciplinary proceedings under bank regulations, where the disciplinary authority retains final fact-finding and penal power, natural justice requires notice of tentative disagreement with a favourable inquiry report before adverse findings are recorded. The authority must record its reasons for disagreement and give the delinquent officer a real opportunity to represent on the proposed reversal. The Court treated this stage as part of the first and decisive stage of the disciplinary process and disapproved contrary views that no further opportunity was needed. The appeals failed, and the orders setting aside the penalties and directing release of retirement benefits were affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166229</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>