AIR 1992 SUPREME COURT 1981 ::1992 AIR SCW 2304 ::1992 LAB. I. C. 2037 ::(1992) 2 CurLR 825 ::1993 UJ(SC) 1 45 ::(1992) 65 FacLR 853 ::1992 (4) SCC 711 ::1993 SCC (L&S) 13 ::(1992) 2 LabLJ 744 ::1993 BBCJ 65 ::(1993) 82 FJR 417 ::(1992) 2 Lab LN 1059 ::(1993) 2 Pat LJR 118 ::(1992) 5 ServLR 394 ::(1992) 3 SCJ 201 ::(1992) 4 SCR 325 (SC) ::(1993) 23 ATC 382 ::(1992) 2 UPLBEC 1189 ::(1992) 5 JT 511 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

Hon'ble Judge(s): Lalit Mohan Sharma, M. M. Punchhi, Yogeshwar Dayal , JJJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.311— Disciplinary proceedings - Nature and scope - Different from that of a criminal case - Acquittal in criminal case cannot therefore conclude disciplinary proceedings. Disciplinary proceedings - Acquittal of delinquent in criminal case - Effect. Industrial Disputes Act (14 of 1947) , Sch.II Item.3— (Para 5) (B) Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules (1965) , R.10(4)(3)— Suspension - Automatic suspension in case order of removal, dismissal etc. is set aside and Disciplinary Authority decides to hold further enquiry - Sub-rule (4) cannot be read down as limited only to employees who were earlier under suspension - It is also not discriminatory. 1988 (2) ATR 232 (CAT-Bom), Overruled.Interpretation of Statutes - Reading down of statute - Not permissible when language is clear. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 providing for automatic suspension of a Government servant on the order of his punishment by way of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service being set aside by the decision of a court of law is not discriminatory. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 cannot also be read down by limiting its applicability only to cases in which Government servants were placed unde....