Back
SANDEEP V. MARNE
Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Ravindra Adhar Gosavi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A. THE CHALLENGE
1. Petitioners challenge Judgment and order dated 06.08.2022 passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Dhule in Revision (ULP) No.14 of 2019 thereby confirming the Judgment and order dated 01.03.2019 passed by the Judge, Labour Court, Dhule in Complaint (ULP) No. 01/2017. The Labour Court, Dhule has declared the order dated 20.01.2016 imposing penalty of dismissal on Respondent as illegal and has set aside the same with a further direction to reinstate him in service along with full back wages and continuity of service from 20.01.2016.
B. FACTS
2. The respondent joined the services of petitioner/Transport Corporation on the post of driver in the year 1990. During the course of his service, he came to be promoted to the post of Assistant Traffic Inspector. On 27.10.2014, respondent was arrested by the Anti Corruption Bureau on allegation of demanding and accepting illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/- and Crime No. 3274/2014 came to be registered against him under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. The respondent was issued memorandum of charge sheet dated 02.08.2014 alleging that one Shri. S.S. Dhivare, Driver was involved in an accident on
In a situation where the domestic enquiry is found to be vitiated, only the evidence adduced before the labour court should be considered to establish the charges. The evidence from the domestic enqu....
(1) Disciplinary Enquiry – Rules of evidence which apply to a criminal trial are distinct from those which govern a disciplinary enquiry – Acquittal of accused in a criminal case does not debar emplo....
Disciplinary proceedings' standards differ from criminal trials; acquittal does not bar disciplinary action if evidence supports charges.
Departmental misconduct charges require proof via witness examination on preponderance of probability; unproved complaint/arrest documents insufficient, warranting quashing of dismissal, with crimina....
A disciplinary enquiry must be based on evidence; mere allegations or FIR production without witness examination cannot substantiate a finding of guilt.
Disciplinary proceedings for corruption may stand despite the non-examination of the complainant if there is sufficient corroborative evidence consistent with the misconduct charged.
Departmental inquiries require a preponderance of probabilities for proof, differing from the strict standards in criminal trials, and insufficient evidence can render dismissal illegal.
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
