Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

STATE OF U.P. versus RAVINDER NATHCHATURVEDI AND ANR.

Decided
28 August 1995
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Appeal(s) allowed

Citations

Official
[1995] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 108 · 1995 INSC 503
Not shown
1 other citation string that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Unnumbered paragraph

Leave granted. Heard le~rned counsel for the parties.

p. 109, margin A

Unnumbered paragraph

The High Court has set aside the imposition of the penalty on the respondents on the ground that no reasonable opportunity was given to the respondents during the inquiry by the Inquiry officer. It is also found that no one was examined to prove the case of the State. It would be desirable that an officer who is acquainted with the records may also be examined to prove the documentary evidence and opportunity may be given to the respondents to cross-examine the witness or produce any evidence in rebuttal. Thereafter, inquiry will be conducted, the report will be given and copy thereof will be supplied to the respondents.

p. 109, margin A

Unnumbered paragraph

The order of the High Court in accordingly set aside. The Inquiry Officer, if he is still in service is directed to conduct and complete the inquiry within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this Order. If he is not in service, the State is directed to appoint another Inquiry Officer afresh who would do the needful within the said period.

p. 109, margin C

Unnumbered paragraph

In case of fresh appointment of Inquiry Officer, the State Government is directed to appoint an Inquiry Officer within one month from the date of receipt of this Order. After submission of the report by the Inquiry Officer, the State Government is further directed to consider the inquiry report and take appropriate decision within three months thereafter.

p. 109, margin D

Unnumbered paragraph

The appeal is accordingly allowed with the above directions. No costs. T.N.A. Appeal allowed.

p. 109, margin E