https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290316 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and reinstating the decisions of the trial court and first appellate court. The respondent's termination of services following a criminal conviction was upheld, with the Court emphasizing that the actions taken against him did not amount to double jeopardy as they were based on distinct grounds. The Court clarified that the respondent's punishment for proven misconduct and subsequent penalties were separate proceedings, not violating the protection against being prosecuted twice for the same offense under Article 20(2) of the Constitution. en-us Tue, 04 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Sep 2020 16:31:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290316 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and reinstating the decisions of the trial court and first appellate court. The respondent's termination of services following a criminal conviction was upheld, with the Court emphasizing that the actions taken against him did not amount to double jeopardy as they were based on distinct grounds. The Court clarified that the respondent's punishment for proven misconduct and subsequent penalties were separate proceedings, not violating the protection against being prosecuted twice for the same offense under Article 20(2) of the Constitution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290316