<?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>2009 (7) TMI 1220 - Delhi High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171043</link>
    <description>A charge memo founded on a pseudonymous complaint may be interfered with at the threshold where the admitted record discloses no real misconduct and the proceedings appear mala fide. On the first charge, the advance and refund were handled by cheque and reversed before the memo, indicating at most an innocuous or bona fide mistake, not wilful misconduct. On the second charge, the delayed foreign tour advance adjustment was voluntarily regularised before the memo and was not treated as misconduct on these facts. The Court also noted the timing after DPC clearance for promotion, which suggested victimisation, and held that exceptional judicial review is available where disciplinary action is wholly illegal or an abuse of power.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2015 12:34:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=389662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1220 - Delhi High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171043</link>
      <description>A charge memo founded on a pseudonymous complaint may be interfered with at the threshold where the admitted record discloses no real misconduct and the proceedings appear mala fide. On the first charge, the advance and refund were handled by cheque and reversed before the memo, indicating at most an innocuous or bona fide mistake, not wilful misconduct. On the second charge, the delayed foreign tour advance adjustment was voluntarily regularised before the memo and was not treated as misconduct on these facts. The Court also noted the timing after DPC clearance for promotion, which suggested victimisation, and held that exceptional judicial review is available where disciplinary action is wholly illegal or an abuse of power.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>