Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANDEEP KUMAR
Manoj Kumar Sudhanshu, Dy. S.P., Batch- 45th Son of Late Ramayan Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of misconduct against the petitioner (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 7) |
| 2. arguments against simultaneous imposition of major and minor penalties (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. court's observations on disciplinary proceedings (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. imposition of both major and minor penalties is unlawful (Para 14 , 15) |
| 5. modification of the punishment order (Para 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP KUMAR, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This application has been filed challenging the punishment order dated 22.12.2022, by which the petitioner has been visited with the punishment of withholding of five increments with cumulative effect and prohibition on promotion for five years from the due date of promotion. The petitioner has also challenged the inquiry report dated 02.05.2022, by which petitioner has been found guilty in the departmental proceeding as well as the memo of charge dated 28.08.2019. The petitioner has further challenged another purported charge memo dated 01.08.2019. The petitioner has also challenged the preliminary inquiry report dated 26.02.2019 and the letter dated 05.08.2019, by which additional relevant docu
Disciplinary authorities cannot impose both major and minor penalties simultaneously; violations of procedural propriety in inquiries can invalidate punitive actions.
The disciplinary authority must provide reasons for disagreement with the inquiry report, record its own findings on the charges, and provide the government servant with an opportunity to file a writ....
Failure to issue a second show-cause notice as required by Rule 15(10)(i)(b) invalidates the disciplinary punishment, emphasizing adherence to procedural fairness.
Disciplinary proceedings require oral evidence for proving charges; failure to provide a witness list vitiates the inquiry, emphasizing adherence to natural justice standards.
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
