https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297159 Disciplinary punishment of a judicial officer cannot rest merely on the alleged incorrectness of land acquisition awards; it requires proof that the decision-making process was tainted by extraneous considerations, misconduct, or lack of judicial probity. The SC noted that suspicion or an inference drawn only from the compensation amount is insufficient, especially where one award had been upheld and enhanced in higher proceedings. As no independent material supported the allegation of impropriety, the dismissal was held unsustainable, the disciplinary action was set aside, and reinstatement with consequential benefits followed. en-us Fri, 06 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Aug 2021 08:31:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297159 Disciplinary punishment of a judicial officer cannot rest merely on the alleged incorrectness of land acquisition awards; it requires proof that the decision-making process was tainted by extraneous considerations, misconduct, or lack of judicial probity. The SC noted that suspicion or an inference drawn only from the compensation amount is insufficient, especially where one award had been upheld and enhanced in higher proceedings. As no independent material supported the allegation of impropriety, the dismissal was held unsustainable, the disciplinary action was set aside, and reinstatement with consequential benefits followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297159