Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.G.PANDIT AND GEETHA K.B.
SMT FOUJIYA TARANNUM W/O MOHAMMED USMAN – Appellant
Versus
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT – Respondent
ORDER :
S. G. PANDIT, J.
The petitioner, wife of one Mohammed Usman, who was working as Village Accountant in the Revenue Department, is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order dated 4.7.2024 in Application No.11281/2023 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Belagavi, For short, ‘Tribunal’, whereunder the Tribunal passed the following order:
(i) The impugned endorsement order bearing No.KamE 341 BSC 2022 dated 31.07.2023 Annexure-A13 issued by the respondent No.2 is set-aside partly wherein it relates to giving retrial benefits to the applicant for her deceased husband.
(ii) Respondents shall consider the case of the applicant under relevant rules and examine whether any retrial benefits can be provided in terms of Rules discussed above after considering the matter afresh within a reasonable time frame of six months from the date of issue of this order and issue appropriate orders thereafter as per Rules.
2. Brief facts of the case are that, when the husband of the petitioner was working as Village Accountant, charge memo dated 8.2.2010 was issued alleging following two charges:
3. Enquiry Officer, who was appointed to en
Procedural deficiencies in disciplinary inquiries violate natural justice principles, leading to invalidity of dismissal and entitling affected parties to reconsideration of benefits.
Disciplinary proceedings against a retired government servant must comply with statutory requirements, including issuing a second show-cause notice and following appropriate rules for post-retirement....
A de novo enquiry against a retired employee is impermissible in law unless permitted by service rules, highlighting the protection of employees' rights post-retirement.
The unexplained delay in disciplinary proceedings and the non-speaking nature of orders can vitiate the proceedings and be contrary to the principles of natural justice.
Inordinate delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings post-retirement can prejudice the defense, warranting quashing of charge memos under Rule 214 of KCSRs.
Disciplinary proceedings initiated post-superannuation must adhere to principles of natural justice, and delayed retirement benefits warrant interest.
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
