Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Bajrang Lal (EX-CT) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed against removal from service. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. procedural flaws in inquiry and charge-sheet. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. verification supports petitioner's caste certificate. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court orders reinstatement but denies back pay. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. writ petition disposed with court directions. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):--Matter has been heard by way of video conferencing.
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 29th December, 2019, 4th June, 2020 and 7th June, 2021 whereby the petitioner was removed from service. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable GD in CISF after qualifying a competitive examination held by Staff Selection Commission on 3rd April, 2017. He states that the petitioner served the department to the satisfaction of his superior officers till the passing of the impugned order. He states that vide Memorandum dated 7th September, 2019, a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner alleging that the petitioner had secured em
The enforcement of service rights requires adherence to due process and fair inquiry, particularly in disciplinary actions against employees.
The verification of the OBC certificate and the entitlement of the petitioner to the benefit of his caste were central to the court's decision to set aside the removal orders and direct reinstatement....
A statutory petition's nomenclature does not restrict its maintainability, and it must be adjudicated based on its merits.
Disciplinary proceedings must prioritize conduct and efficiency; failure to engage in due process can lead to disciplinary action despite claims of injustice.
Discharge based on false caste representation is unjustified if the candidate disclosed accurate information during recruitment and relied on the appointment for an extended period.
Verification of the genuineness of the subsequent caste certificate and imposition of proportionate punishment in accordance with the CRPF Act, 1949.
In the absence of confirmation of service and pendency of departmental process to verify caste certificate, protection against ouster as per Kavita Solunke and Shalini judgments is not applicable.
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
