Back
V. KAMESWAR RAO, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
R. S. Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 27957/2023
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 7176/2023
1. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated May 19, 2022 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) in OA 1532/2015. Though the Tribunal vide the aforesaid order had decided two Original Applications only one applicant namely R.S. Bhatia has approached this Court by way of this writ petition challenging the impugned order.
2. The challenge in the OA was to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner which resulted in penalty of 20% cut in pension for a period of five years. The appeal filed thereof was also dismissed. The Tribunal dismissed the petition by stating in paragraph 10 as under:
"10. In the instant case, we find that a common enquiry had been conducted against the applicant and other co- defaulters, as per the prescribed procedure and in accordance with principles of natural justice. The applicant has participated in the enquiry proceedings and has been given ample opportunity to defend himself. The IO, after assessing the evidence adduced, has concluded that the charges a
Courts emphasize the importance of reasoned and speaking orders, and the need for tribunals to consider and address the grounds raised by the parties.
The court has the power of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings and can set aside orders if they are not in accordance with the law.
The limited scope of judicial scrutiny in cases of departmental inquiries, where the judicial review is confined to correcting errors of law or procedural error resulting in manifest miscarriage of j....
Adherence to statutory provisions and principles of natural justice in imposing penalties.
Imposition of punishment after charges were not proved is unjust, and the respondent should be restored to the same position as if no punishment had been imposed.
Courts do not act as appellate forums for disciplinary findings but may interfere if a punishment is disproportionate to the proven charges, requiring reconsideration if the penalty imposes excessive....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings is limited, and the High Court shall not reappreciate the evidence or interfere with ....
Natural justice requires meaningful opportunity for defense in disciplinary inquiries; failure to adhere justifies annulment of punitive orders.
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
