Back
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
Satya Ranjan Bose – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 26.04.2012, passed by the District Magistrate, Purnea, whereby and whereunder 5% pension of the petitioner had been directed to be deducted by way of punishment under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the appellate order dated 13.11.2013, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Purnia Division, Purnia, whereby and whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected.
2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner was appointed as Mohrim in Revenue Department (Settlement Office) at Purnia and had retired on 31.01.2008.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while the petitioner was posted at Karim Nagar Anchal, a charge-sheet dated 18.08.2004 was issued to the petitioner levelling 04 charges and a department proceeding was initiated against him. The department inquiry was held and the Inquiry Officer submitted an inquiry report, however, it is submitted that there is no finding regarding the petitioner having indulged in any sort of gross misconduct or having cau
Charges in disciplinary proceedings must be proved based on preponderance of probability, and compliance with procedural rules is mandatory. Pension deduction requires grave misconduct or pecuniary l....
The main legal point established is the requirement to prove charges with a preponderance of probability and the mandatory nature of procedural rules in departmental proceedings.
Disciplinary action under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules requires proof of grave misconduct or financial loss to the government; failure to provide substantiated reasoning in orders renders th....
Adherence to principles of natural justice and the correct application of pension rules are crucial in disciplinary proceedings against government employees.
Disciplinary actions against retired government employees must adhere to procedural norms and valid evidence; Rule 43(a) pertains to future conduct and not misconduct occurring during service.
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
