Back
PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE
R. Kasivelu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.
Prelude:
1. The legal conflict revolving around the present writ petition originated from an incident of scuffling with a colleague, which eventually entailed the petitioner’s removal from service.
Facts:
2. To appreciate the conflict, the necessitous facts, as unfurled by the parties in their pleadings, need to be noticed.
3. The petitioner joined the Central Industrial Security Force (in short, CISF) as Constable (no. 831550107 HC/GD) on 13.09.1983. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Head Constable and posted in CISF Unit at ONGC Nazira, Assam.
4. In 2003, the petitioner was served with a Charge Memorandum vide. dated September 24, 2003, which was issued in terms of the Rule 36 CISF Rules, on the allegation that, on 01.09.2003, while he was posted in SLAA Rig Out of Lakwa Sector, he was involved in a scuffle with a constable namely, Jaibir Singh (no. 834150087) at about 12.25 hours resulting in the constable suffering a head injury and being admitted in ONGC hospital at Sivasagar.
5. The Inspector/Exe. Mr. A. N. Tiwari reported the incident to the Lakwa Sector Control Room which was registered as GDSL no. 28 and 45 dated 01.09.2003.
6. Th
Disciplinary proceedings must comply with natural justice principles, including the right to a fair hearing and the opportunity to engage a defense representative, to ensure proportionality in punish....
The Court upheld the penalty of removal from service based on the petitioner's admission of charges, failure to submit written explanations, and the consideration of the petitioner's previous conduct....
The court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline in an armed force and upheld the disciplinary authority's decision based on the evidence presented during the proceedings.
The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with the rules of natural justice, evidence-based findings of misconduct, and the proportionality of punishment in disciplinary proceedings.
The High Court will not interfere with the findings of fact arrived at in departmental enquiry proceedings except in a case of mala fides or perversity. The quantum of punishment in disciplinary matt....
The High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
Procedural safeguards, fair hearing, and compliance with statutory mandates are essential in disciplinary proceedings, and the violation of such safeguards can render the disciplinary action void.
Disciplinary proceedings must follow the principles of natural justice, including the right to evidence, but non-supply of evidence does not invalidate proceedings if the accused received a fair chan....
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including providing access to relevant evidence. Failure to follow these may invalidate the proceedings.
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
