Back
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
Abhijit Kumar Talapatra – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.
1. The writ petitioner prays for setting aside of an Enquiry Report dated 23.3.2018 and for allowing the petitioner to participate in the enquiry proceedings upon reopening the enquiry once again.
2. The impugned Enquiry Report dated 23.3.2018 concludes that all the 21 charges levelled against the petitioner, who was the Controller of the Examinations of the University at the relevant point of time, have been established in the enquiry on an unconditional and voluntary admission of the charges by the petitioner (Charged Officer) on repeated occasions. The petitioner was suspended by the University by an order dated 3.3.2017 in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks setting aside of the Enquiry Report on several grounds. Counsel submits that the disciplinary authority deliberately delayed the enquiry proceedings and failed to produce the documents which the petitioner asked for. Counsel submits that the petitioner replied to the Enquiry Report by denying the findings of the Enquiry Officer and requested the Vice-Chancellor of the University to reopen the enquiry. It is further submitted that
In disciplinary actions, individual misconduct must be clearly established to justify severe penalties such as compulsory retirement and deduction of gratuity.
Violation of principles of natural justice in conducting enquiry and imposing punishment
The failure to furnish an enquiry report to an employee before the imposition of a penalty and the enquiry officer assuming the dual role of judge and prosecutor are violations of natural justice tha....
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to procedural fairness, but the absence of witness examination does not automatically void an inquiry if the charged party fails to propose witnesses.
Disciplinary proceedings vitiate if an inquiry is conducted without serving proper notice to the delinquent, denying the right to cross-examine witnesses and failing to furnish a copy of the inquiry ....
Disciplinary authorities must follow the established procedure of law and judicial pronouncements in disciplinary proceedings.
Post-superannuation fresh departmental enquiry invalid under Pension Rules 1982 Rule 27 after two service-period exonerations; no de novo without reasons/opportunity; mandates release of salary, pens....
The Disciplinary Authority can order further enquiry only if serious defects exist in the initial enquiry; it cannot do so after a finding of exoneration.
The court established that the initiation of the Departmental Proceeding did not violate natural justice as per the Gauhati University Teachers Conduct Rules 1984, and the imposed penalties were prop....
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
