Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, JASMEET SINGH
Ashutosh Gautam – Appellant
Versus
Icar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Shakdher, J. - Issue notice.
1.1. Mr S. K. Gupta accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself, based on the record presently available with the Court.
3. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.01.2022, passed by the Central administrative Tribunal [in short, the 'Tribunal'] in O.a. No.179/2022.
3.1. Mr M. K. Bhardwaj, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the Tribunal has dismissed the aforesaid O.a. via the impugned order, simply, on the ground of limitation. 3.2 according to Mr Bhardwaj, apart from anything else, there was a challenge in the O.a. to the order dated 12.07.2021 passed by respondent no.4 i.e., Chief Vigilance Officer, Indian Council of agricultural Research [in short, 'ICaR'], whereby the appointing authority for the post of assistant Legal advisor [in short 'aLa'] i.e., Secretary, ICaR was appointed as the disciplinary authority qua the petitioner.
3.3 Mr Bhardwaj says that the petitioner was transferred from ICaR Headquarters to the Indian agr
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to address the petitioner's claim regarding the disciplinary authority and the possibility of victimization, and the court's author....
The Tribunal's dismissal of an application based solely on limitation, without addressing substantive legal claims, constitutes a reversible error warranting judicial intervention.
Original Application before Administrative Tribunal dismissed at admission for being barred by one-year limitation under Section 21 AT Act without condonation application or sufficient cause shown fo....
Procedural irregularities in an adjudicatory process cannot be sustained, and the person(s) who hear an aggrieved party must decide and render reasons.
The court emphasized the necessity for timely resolution of tribunal applications to facilitate uninterrupted disciplinary proceedings and uphold the integrity of the process.
The court emphasized the importance of a discussion on merits in the adjudication of the matter and the need for both sides to have the opportunity to present their respective stands before the Tribu....
Provisional participation in interview pending fresh action before the Tribunal
The court directed provisional participation in an interview while preserving the ability to contest eligibility, emphasizing that such permission does not confer rights pending further Tribunal acti....
The disciplinary authority must make a timely decision, and the petitioner has the right to challenge the decision if adverse.
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
