Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
JC 492095w Nb Sub Gopi Ram – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The petitioner in his present petition has made following prayer:
(a) To set aside the impugned summary trial punishment order dated 16.03.2022 being wholly illegal and violative of various statutory provisions.
(b) To set aside the impugned order, further hold and declare the petitioner as fully relieved of all the adverse consequences inflicted upon the petitioner including the discharge/retirement orders on account of non-grant of promotion, enhancement of age of superannuation, length of service and all other services aspects specifically taken away/made in applicable due to the effect of the impugned summary trial conviction order dated 16.03.2022.
(c) to direct the respondent nos. 2 and 4 to grant the service limit of the petitioner thereby permitting the petitioner to continue in service till final disposal of the present writ petition as permissible under the law by keeping in abeyance the discharge/release order dated 03.11.2021.
2. It is not in dispute that after the discharge/release order dated 03.11.2021, the petitioner had filed a revision dated 21.09.2022. However, the said revision has not been decided whereas the petitioner has retired from servic
Timely decision on revision petition
Delay and laches can impact the admissibility of a petition, especially when seeking relief related to pension release.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making and providing a reasoned order in cases of appeal against removal from service.
Dismissal of conditioning writ as infructuous entitles retired employee to terminal benefits without impediment.
Timely adjudication of representation seeking refixation of seniority.
Retrospective penalties for compulsory retirement are impermissible and must align with the order date past which no previous penalty exists.
The court declined to interfere in the discharge order as the issue was pending before the Armed Forces Tribunal and the discharge was subject to the final decision.
The main legal point established is the distinction between discharge simplicitor and stigmatic orders, and the relevance of revisional authority's decision in such cases.
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
