Back
V. KAMESWAR RAO, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Chinthapally Rajasekhar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J.
1. The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated December 2, 2020, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, ('Tribunal., for short) in Original Application No.3421/2019 ('OA., for short) whereby the Tribunal has allowed the OA filed by the respondent herein, thereby setting aside the order of punishment passed against the respondent with a further observation that it shall be open to the Disciplinary Authority to pass a fresh order, keeping in view, the findings and observations in the order. The Tribunal was of the view that in case the Disciplinary Authority feels that punishment needs to be imposed, it shall be one which does not come in the way of the entitlement of the respondent to be promoted, subject to his otherwise being found fit. It also directed that if any sealed cover was maintained, it shall be opened and consequential steps shall be taken.
2. The facts as noted from the record are that the respondent is an officer of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) of 1990 batch. He earned various promotions while working as Joint Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs. He was issued a charge memo dated February 2
Judicial review in disciplinary proceedings is limited to procedural legality; the Tribunal cannot substitute its own judgment unless findings are perverse.
In disciplinary proceedings, authorities cannot rely on uncharged extraneous facts; even proved single charge of inadvertent suppression requires assessing misconduct gravity and proportionality befo....
The disciplinary authority has the exclusive power to determine the nature and quantum of punishment in disciplinary proceedings, and judicial review is limited to cases where the penalty is grossly ....
The submission of false medical certificates by a government employee constitutes serious misconduct justifying dismissal from service under the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to conduct a fair inquiry in disciplinary proceedings and the need to adhere to the principles of natural justice. The court emphas....
Disciplinary proceedings initiated by a borrowing authority are valid, and the punishment must be proportionate to the misconduct proven in the inquiry.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's scrutiny of the disciplinary proceedings, finding the charge to be a repeat attempt suffering from unexplained delay, and the failure o....
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
