Back
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL
Tomeshwari Bhandari S/o Lekharam Bhandari – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Assailing the legality, validity and correctness of the order of the Collector dated 08.08.2016, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, by which, the Collector, Kabirdham has dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner herein while affirming the order of the Tahsildar dated 17.03.2016, by which, she has been inflicted with the penalty of stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative effect under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short the Rules of 1966).
2. The petitioner was subjected with a notice dated 17.12.2015 by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bodla along-with the charge sheet vide Annexure P-4, to which, the petitioner replied by filing reply Annexure P-5 that the alleged misconduct is not made out and, as such, the charges deserve to be dropped against her. Thereafter, the learned Tahsildar, Bodla by order dated 17.03.2016 finding that the reply to the charge sheet filed by the petitioner is not satisfactory proceeded to impose a penalty by stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative effect under Rule 10(v) of the Rules of 1966.
3. Feeling aggrieved by that order, the petitioner herei
Stoppage of increments with cumulative effect is a major penalty requiring a departmental enquiry under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services Rules, 1966.
Stoppage of increment with cumulative effect is a major penalty requiring a regular departmental inquiry; failure to conduct such inquiry renders the order illegal.
The imposition of major penalties, such as withholding increments with cumulative effect, requires a proper enquiry as per established legal principles.
The imposition of a penalty not prescribed under statutory rules is invalid, and cumulative penalties are not permissible under the Central Reserve Police Force Rules.
The stoppage of increments with cumulative effect is deemed a major penalty requiring a formal inquiry as per relevant regulations and previous court rulings.
The satisfaction of the disciplinary authority to decide on a regular departmental enquiry is subjective and not open for judicial review unless based on extraneous consideration or suffering from pe....
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
