HARISH KUMAR
Srikant Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Harish Kumar, J.—This Court has heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Shailesh Kumar, learned Advocate as well as Mrs. Babita Kumari, learned Advocate for the State.
2. Since both the impugned orders inflicting the punishment of dismissal from services are arising out of the one and the same occurrence, leading to identical charges and departmental proceeding in the premise of similar facts, hence both the writ petitions are being heard together and disposed off by this common order.
3. In CWJC No. 1208 of 2021, the challenge is made to the order contained in Memo No. 286 dated 27.02.2020, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Rail, Muzaffarpur, whereby and whereunder, in pursuant to Departmental Enquiry No. 16/2019, the petitioner has been inflicted with the punishment of dismissal. The appeal preferred by the petitioner also came to be rejected vide order contained in Memo No. 173 dated 26.05.2020, issued under the signature of respondent no. 3, The Additional Director General of Police, Law & Order, Bihar, Patna. The challenge is also made to the aforesaid order along with the memo of charge.
Roop Singh Negi vs. Punjab National Bank
Sher Bahadur vs. Union of India
Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal
Bharat Prasad Yadav vs. State of Bihar
Kuldeep Singh vs. Commissioner of Police
The absence of a witness list in a disciplinary charge memo violates procedural fairness, rendering the proceedings invalid, necessitating adherence to natural justice principles.
In departmental inquiries, the absence of strict adherence to evidentiary rules does not negate the validity of proceedings; evidence is assessed based on the preponderance of probabilities.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of evidence to prove charges in a disciplinary proceeding, the need for adherence to natural justice principles, and the entitle....
Departmental enquiry quashed for violating rules by denying cross-examination opportunity, examining witnesses behind back with only signature proof, and failing to consider replies; remitted for fre....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.