Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Jagbir Singh Kaushik – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks compliance with prior court directives. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding inquiry process and covid-19 guidelines. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. inquiry conducted per guidelines; court reviews legal merit. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. court dismisses writ petition due to lack of merit. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--This matter has been taken up for hearing today, as 18th October, 2021 was declared a holiday.
2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents to comply with the order dated 20th July 2021 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 6745/2021 titled as Jagbir Singh Kauhsik vs. Union of India & Ors.. Petitioner also seeks to challenge the order dated 25th August 2021 passed by IG, BSF and the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.
3. In the present writ petition, it has been averred that the earlier writ petition preferred by the Petitioner was disposed of vide order dated 20th July 2021 by giving directions to the respondents that the officer scrutinising the charge and evidence against the petitioner would also examine the same from the Petitioner's point of view as well, specifically whether there is merit in
Disciplinary proceedings under the Border Security Force Act allow for internal grievance mechanisms, thus limiting court interference unless extreme injustices are demonstrated.
Disciplinary actions must satisfy the test of reasonableness. Imposing severe penalties for absence during a global health crisis without considering extenuating circumstances beyond the employee’s c....
A government servant who is unable to return to his headquarters due to non-availability of public transport during a pandemic is deemed to have joined duty on the date of expiry of official tour.
The decision of the Disciplinary Authority must be based on legal evidence and reasonable; the Court may interfere if the finding is based on no evidence or is unreasonable.
The absence from duty without application or permission may not always amount to unauthorized absence, especially in the context of compelling circumstances such as illness or quarantine due to COVID....
The decision of a disciplinary authority must be supported by substantial evidence, and failure to do so renders the findings perverse and quashable.
A charged official cannot defend himself by claiming others engaged in similar misconduct; legal authority is required for actions taken in official capacity.
The main legal point established is that a restriction cannot be imposed retrospectively, and in the absence of evidence of a quarantine directive, the petitioner's actions did not constitute a viola....
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
