Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Ram Kishan – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. (Oral)--The present Petition is arising out of an order dated 27.01.2011 passed in Original Application No. 147/2008 by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dismissing the Original Application which was preferred against the dismissal order dated 06.06.2007 and the order rejecting the plea dated 07.12.2007.
2. The facts of the case reveal that the Petitioner before this Court who was serving on the Post of Constable in the Delhi Police establishment allegedly on 30.04.2006 while posted at PS Parliamentary Street, stopped a vehicle and demanded bribe from the vehicle owner. However, at the same time Inspector Satya Pal Singh, SHO Tilak Marg, reached the spot and the Petitioner immediately permitted the driver of the Maruti Van to leave the place and he also fled away from the spot on his Government Motorcycle.
3. The driver finally lodged a report in the matter with the Police and a preliminary enquiry took place. In the preliminary enquiry, the Enquiry Officer found the Petitioner guilty on 05.10.2006, and in those circumstances, the competent Disciplinary Authority took a decision on 22.12.2006 to hold a regular Departmental Enquiry ke
Judicial review of disciplinary decisions is limited to procedural fairness; evidence supporting misconduct must be acknowledged, and findings will not be overturned unless shown to be perverse.
The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial interference in departmental enquiries and the principle that the High Court cannot act as a second court of first appeal.
Fairness in disciplinary proceedings requires adherence to natural justice, and actions unsupported by adequate evidence are not sustainable.
In departmental proceedings, the standard of proof is based on the preponderance of probabilities, and the court will not interfere with the disciplinary authority's findings unless there is a clear ....
The High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
The main legal point established is the limited scope of interference in departmental inquiries by the court, which can only be done in specific circumstances such as violation of principles of natur....
Under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court shall not re-appreciate the evidence, interfere with the conclusions in the enquiry, in case the same has been conducted in accordan....
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
