Back
RAVI NATH TILHARI, K. MANMADHA RAO
C. Govinda Rajulu – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.
Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi, learned counsel, representing Sri Vijaya Kumar Sata, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G. V. S. Kishore Kumar, learned Government Pleader, Services-I, appearing for the respondents.
2. By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (in short “APAT”) in O.A.No.5535 of 2014, dated 15.09.2017, by which, the petitioner’s OA was dismissed.
3. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in 2nd Battalion, APSP, Kurnool on 17.08.1994. He was placed under suspension vide Rc.No.A6/PR-17/2013 (D.O.No.267/2013), dated 22.05.2013, on the allegation of misbehavior with another lady junior assistant, however, he was reinstated into service and charge memo dated 03.06.2013 was issued.
4. The articles of charges are as follows:
“Article-I: That Sri C. Govinda Rajulu, Junior Assistant (u/s), 2nd Battalion, APSP, APSP, Kurnool has exhibited most reprehensible misconduct in misbehaving with Smt. G. Jhancy Lakshmi, Junior Assistant on 10.05.2013 afternoon during the lunch hours, while Smt. G. Jhansi lakshmi, Juni
The judgment emphasizes the importance of specific and proven charges, adherence to procedural rules, and consideration of the petitioner's explanation in disciplinary proceedings.
It is also settled law that if the rule requires something to be done in a particular manner it should be done either in the same manner or not at all.
Fair and proper procedure must be adhered to in disciplinary proceedings, including evidence examination and the right to cross-examine witnesses, to ensure justice.
The judgment establishes the application of The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 in addressing workplace sexual harassment and emphasizes the ....
Point of law: High Court is not a court of appeal over the decision of the authorities holding a departmental enquiry against a public servant. It is concerned to determine whether the enquiry is hel....
statement recorded in the preliminary enquiry, which are behind the back of the Applicant, and for which he had no opportunity to cross-examine them, cannot be used in regular inquiry, as the delinqu....
The main legal point established is that the Presiding Officer of the Internal Complaints Committee must be a higher level woman officer in accordance with Section 4(2)(a) of the Sexual Harassment of....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
