Section 12. Appointment of officers and other employees of the Board
(1) For the purpose of enabling it efficiently to discharge its functions under this Act, the Board may, subject to such regulations as may be made in this behalf, appoint (whether on deputation or otherwise) such number of officers and other employees as it may consider necessary:
Provided that the appointment of such category of officers, as may be specified in such regulations, shall be subject to the approval of the Central Government.
(2) Every officer or other employee appointed by the Board shall be subject to such conditions of service and shall be entitled to such remuneration as may be specified in the regulations.
Judgements applying section 12
The plea challenges the validity of an inquiry order bad on two grounds: the collector who passed the order was not the Appropriate Authority at the time of the incident, and the inquiry lacked the mandatory presence of two independent witnesses.
DismissedOpenHIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.13941 of 2023 Rabi Narayan Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. L.N.Patel, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Saswat Das, A.G.A. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 15.05
DisposedOpenJUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2200/2016 Dr. Renu Bhatia ----Petitioner Versus State & Ors. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2205/2016 Dr. Bipin Bhatia ----Petitioner Versus State
AllowedOpenMehul Acharya, Appropriate Authority (Pc and Pndt) and. Dy. Health Officer Vs Jayesh Kantilal Shah
Outcome: DismissedTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1669 of 2019 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11262 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2019 In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1669 of 2019 ===================
DismissedOpenJayesh Kantilal Shah Vs Mehul Acharya, Appropriate Authority (Pc and Pndt) and. Dy. Health Officer
Outcome: AllowedThis High Court order directed the respondent authority to de-seal a petitioner's sonography machine within two weeks. The court found that while departmental proceedings were ongoing, the machine had not been treated as a seized article in a criminal investigation, making indefinite sealing imprudent.
AllowedOpen
Show 4 more
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No. 458 of 2018 Decided on : 26.6.2018 Health Department …..Petitioner. Versus Dr. Shobha Thakur. ….Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge. Whether approved for repo
DisposedOpenCHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M. Cr. C. ( A ) No. 1411 of 2016 Santosh Kumar Shrivastav (Dr. Santosh Kumar Shrivastav) S/o late Shri Sambhu Lal Shrivastav, aged about 43 years, R/o Village Bawankera, Thana Patewa, Tahsil Mahasamund, District Mahas
DismissedOpenIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.11217 OF 2014 Dr.Harishchandra s/o Madhavrao Wange, age: 65 years, Occ: Medical Practitioner, R/o Jalalpur Road, Vidyanagar, ParliVaijnath, Tq. ParliVaijnath,
AllowedOpen680/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Criminal Writ Petition No.680 of 2012 Dr. Prabhakar s/o Ganpatrao Tawshikar And Another. .. Petitioners. Versus The State of Maharashtra And Another. .. Respondents. ---
DisposedOpen