IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
MADHURESH PRASAD, SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Pijus Kanti Ghorai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Supratim Bhattacharya, J.
1. The respondent herein was the applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ ) was an employee of the Gun & Shell Factory, Cossipore, Kolkata (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘Factory’ ).
2. A complaint was lodged by one Subinay Kar against the said respondent which was received by the said Factory alleging that the said respondent had demanded sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- in lieu of providing a job to the said Mr. Kar in the Factory.
3. On receipt of the said complaint, a vigilance inquiry was directed by the competent authority and on the basis of the report filed by the vigilance authority the said respondent was suspended with effect from 17.07.2015.
4. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated by a Memorandum of Charge dated 21.08.2015 containing the following:
“ARTICLE OF CHARGE-I
That Shri Pijus Kanti Ghorai, Hy. Skilled Gr. 1 (Machinist), Ticket No.130/ Tool Room, Per. No. 006710 of Gun & Shell Factory, Cossipore, Kolkata - 2 is charged with gross misconduct of illegally making money by giving false assurance of Govt. job in Gun & Shell Factory, Cossipore to the outsiders and tarnishing the image
State Bank of India and Others vs. Narendra Kumar Pandey
Secretary,Ministry of Defence and Others vs. Prabhash Chandra Mirdha
Union of India Vs. P. Gunasekharan
Disciplinary proceedings must be supported by adequate evidence, and a lack of procedural compliance can lead to judicial intervention.
The Tribunal upheld the disciplinary proceedings against the applicant for gross misconduct, confirming that natural justice was observed and penalties were within the discretion of the authority.
The power of judicial review, of the Constitutional Courts, is an evaluation of the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision itself. It is to ensure fairness in treatment and not to....
Grant of reinstatement - Court will not ordinarily interfere in the punishment imposed in the disciplinary proceedings to substitute its own conclusion on penalty except where the punishment imposed ....
Judicial review of disciplinary charge memos is limited; premature quashing is improper if charges are supported by evidence, requiring internal resolutions first.
Disciplinary proceedings are invalid if based on prejudicial reliance on undisclosed inquiry reports and if initiated by an incompetent authority, infringing principles of justice.
Neighborhood disputes, especially involving family members, do not constitute official misconduct, and disciplinary proceedings initiated on such grounds without substantial evidence violate principl....
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.