N. V. ANJARIA, SAMIR J. DAVE
KULDIP N. SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N.V. ANJARIA, J.
1. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench by its order dated 11.8.2021 rejected the Miscellaneous Application No. 198 of 2021 of the petitioner, thereby refusing to condone the delay of seven years, eight months and twenty-seven days in filing the Original Application No. 173 of 2021, consequentially the Original Application also stood dismissed.
1.1 It is the aforesaid order dated 11.8.2021 of the Tribunal which is prayed to be set aside in the present petition. The petitioner has further prayed to set aside the memorandum of charge dated 15.9.2012. Also prayed is to set aside order dated 30.7.2020 whereby respondent No. 4 was appointed as Inquiry Officer. The petitioner has next prayed to direct the respondents to release all the retiral dues, gratuity and other consequential benefits which the petitioner is entitled to receive upon attaining the age of superannuation.
2. In the Original Application before the Tribunal, the petitioner wanted a direction against the respondents to produce all documents, files and correspondence between the Home Department and State Government leading to issuance of memorandum of charge dated 15.9.2012 as well
Basawaraj and Another vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer
Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Coal India Limited vs. Ananta Saha and Others
Prabhakar vs. Joint Director, Sericulture Department
Pundlik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project and Another
Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sahu and Others vs. Gobardhan Sao and Others
Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal vs. Rewa Coal Fields Limited
State of Karnataka and Others vs. S.M. Kotrayya and Others
Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company Limited vs. Government of U.P. (1975) 4 SCC 378
Delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings must be examined on a case-by-case basis, and prejudice caused by the delay can lead to the quashing of the charge sheet. Inordinate delay in issuing the ....
Delays in disciplinary proceedings render outcomes unsustainable due to violation of statutory guidelines.
Inordinate unexplained delay of 20 years bars condonation; doctrine of laches prevents revival of stale claims.
The delay in disciplinary proceedings must be properly explained by the Department, and in the absence of a valid and acceptable explanation, the charges can be quashed based on the nature of the cas....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.