<?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>1968 (3) TMI 116 - PUNJAB-HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275901</link>
    <description>Suspension pending departmental enquiry will not be invalidated on allegations of mala fides unless the challenger pleads and proves specific facts showing personal bias or improper motive. The power to suspend was treated as incidental to the power to appoint and was not excluded by the applicable service rules or Tehsildari Rules, so interim suspension pending enquiry remained within jurisdiction. Breach of departmental instructions requiring service of the charge-sheet before suspension did not vitiate the order because those directions were administrative, not statutory, and no prejudice was shown. The writ petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 16:35:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539116" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (3) TMI 116 - PUNJAB-HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275901</link>
      <description>Suspension pending departmental enquiry will not be invalidated on allegations of mala fides unless the challenger pleads and proves specific facts showing personal bias or improper motive. The power to suspend was treated as incidental to the power to appoint and was not excluded by the applicable service rules or Tehsildari Rules, so interim suspension pending enquiry remained within jurisdiction. Breach of departmental instructions requiring service of the charge-sheet before suspension did not vitiate the order because those directions were administrative, not statutory, and no prejudice was shown. The writ petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275901</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>